Z1OwnersClub GB

Chain and sprockets for a z1000 630 or 530 whats do you gain by using 530 chain sprocket

A lot of weight saving.

is weight loss a gain? can you gain weight loss?
hmmmm. .. fat women n salads spring to mind...

530 chain more links smoother running less wear. Wider choice of chain manufacturers.

530 is wider choice and probably cheaper plus is narrower so saves a few mm which can help if you’re on a fatter tyreand/or offset sprocket

I have been meaning to document something on this subject for a long time. Meanwhile I hope this helps.

Firstly, I will explain the numbers and perhaps dispel some myths. The 1st digit describes the chain pitch between pins in 1/8 inch increments. The 2nd and 3rd digits are the internal chain width as a decimal multiplier of 1/8 inch.

Eg.. 630 chain is 6 x 1/8 pitch and 3.0 x 1/8 wide..... 530 chain is 5 x 1/8 pitch and 3.0 x 1/8 wide.

Or to put it another way... A 530 chain is 20% shorter pitch requiring a 20% longer chain run than a 630 chain. The internal width between the plates is exactly the same. Weight and external width saving is due to thinner plates... about 0.2mm each side giving a 720 gram weight saving per 100 links

The attached from DID is a good guide to comparing.



As said the biggest advantage is a bigger choice of chains and one of the things often overlooked is the significantly longer life of X ring chains over O ring type, at least 50% greater wear resistance up to 100% for premium chains.

The only minor downside of 530 chain is equivalent sprockets are not always available off the shelf.

I had Talon make me a 530 dural rear sprocket for my ELR, there is some sort of equation for converting the 630 sprocket sizes to the 530 equivalent, buggered if I can remember it though.

swampy wrote:I had Talon make me a 530 dural rear sprocket for my ELR, there is some sort of equation for converting the 630 sprocket sizes to the 530 equivalent, buggered if I can remember it though.

Yes Talon do custom sprockets also B&C Express

Multiply everything by 1.2 to add the 20% extra teeth and chain length. I have found from experience that it is better to round upwards to the nearest even number of chain links. E.g. 92 link x 1.2 = 110.4. 110 is a little tight so round up to 112. Easier to take links out later if it gets a bit slack.

I will put together a list of off the peg equivalents if it helps? I keep a stock of 18T 530 fronts

an equivalent list would be spot on and very handy for people/