[cintidude04]

Ive put 12000 miles of fun riding on it with in the past 4 months

thats alot of miles in 4 months lol my math maybe off but that puts you over 10k miles for the chain.
no reason you should only be getting 10,000 miles on a chain unless you do no maintenance

[egossett]

he is saying he has put that many on it and the previous owner put some on it too he just doesn't know how many miles were on that chain and sprocket set when he got it.

[Psycho1]

One thing to consider when gearing a mostly stock 600 Kat is that most of the time, the stock engine doesn't make enough power to pull the bike to redline in 6th gear. Stock gearing should be good for around 148mph, but most stock 600's quit pulling around 135mph. Adding 2 teeth to the rear sprocket should give a noticable improvement in acceleration without dropping the top speed noticably, since the engine can just turn a few more rpm in 6th to make up for the gearing change. going from a 46 tooth rear to a 50 tooth rear, will be such a big change that basically your new top speed in 6th gear will be close to your top speed in 5th gear with the stock gearing. Dropping 1 tooth up front from the stock 14 ('90 600 is 14/46 stock), gives nearly the same effect as going 4 teeth bigger on the back, but kills the chain very quick due to the tighter radius of the sprocket.

[johnnyrocket]

just ordered a 15/47 setup for my 600 but take into account im not an aggressive rider, mainly its me and the old lady on day trips

[Crotch Rocketeer]

From what I've read the ideal combination to increase longevity (besides regular adjusting and lubrication) is to install an even number of link chain with odd number of teeth sprockets with the odd number of teeth being as close to a prime number as possible.

My next setup will be a 116/8 link with 14/47 sprockets.

It is true that going with an odd number based setup will increase longevity. If you look at automotive gear ratios, they are often based on odd numbers for this reason (according to an automotive technical manual I am currently reading). That is why, for example, you will see ratios like 3.89:1 or 4.11:1 instead of 4:1.

If you had a gear ratio such as 1:1, you would have the same teeth running against each other all the time. If one tooth is imperfect or damaged, it will wear it's mate each revolution. If you go 2:1 then that imperfect tooth now runs against two unique teeth per revolution, which spreads the extra wear by 50% to each of the two mated teeth.

However, if you change to an odd numbered ratio such as 2.57:1, the same teeth don't meet up every revolution like they would otherwise, so the abnormal tooth gets to spear the wear around the entire gear instead of hitting the same spot each time.

This same idea should apply to chains just as well.

[Daniel DeTinne]

The 520 chain set-up is about 4lbs lighter than the stock 530. The 530 is much stronger and will last longer. if you don't race the weight won't matter much. Gear ratio is the key to acceleration or more top speed. Depends on how you change them. Front gear lower tooth count will increase acceleration and decrease top end. So will one up on the rear. Changing one tooth on the front will make a bigger change in ratio than one tooth on the rear. to figure ratio divide the rear count by the front. 48 divided by 14 the ratio is 3.42 to 1.
The larger the number the more acceleration , the lower the number the more top end.
3.4 to 1 is about the optimal ratio to have great acceleration and still have top end.
Have fun with the ratio change. Hope this helps

[slip304]

After reading through, I'll probably go with a 520 conversion 15/50 set up. Better oomph around town without loosing too much up top for comfortable highway speeds.

[GSXFJim]

The 520 chain set-up is about 4lbs lighter than the stock 530.

Where did you get this info??

A #530 chain weighs .66lb per foot, a #520 weighs .64 and both of those are based on a average tinsel strength of 6,100. Both are a 5/8 pitch. Width of the chain is the only difference, #520 @ 1/4" and the #530 @ 3/8" that's a difference of 1/8"

#520 - .64lb x 118 links = 4.032lb
#530 - .66lb x 118 links = 4.158lb

[hardlydangerous]

chain conversions are one of them...just because you can does not mean you should things.
There is no preformance gains going with a 520 conversion. You get performance gains from changing gearing
The difference is maybe 1 lbs. If its about saving weight, you can get that weight saving by swapping thr stock bar ends and removing the useless peg weights.
even the GS 550 used a 530 chain for a reason...
if you ride a CB400 run the 520 but the Katana is a heavy bike with lots of torque.

stick with the 530 and go with a larger rear sprocket if you want more umph

[Daniel DeTinne]

When I spoke with the rep from Jawzy. He claimed that the set-up [sprockets and chain] would save aprox 4lbs. to convert to 520 from 530
not just the chain.

Where did you get this info??

A #530 chain weighs .66lb per foot, a #520 weighs .64 and both of those are based on a average tinsel strength of 6,100. Both are a 5/8 pitch. Width of the chain is the only difference, #520 @ 1/4" and the #530 @ 3/8" that's a difference of 1/8"

#520 - .64lb x 118 links = 4.032lb
#530 - .66lb x 118 links = 4.158lb

[GSXFJim]

A 530/47t alum rear that i produce weighs right around 1.1lb.. the same unit in a 520 is right about .9lb... not much savings there at all. The fronts are all pretty much the same you can't loose a bunch of weight from them... So I'm not sure where/what your rep is weighing but he's not even close... I have a #530 15/49 being made right now.. I'll weigh them and post up the #'s