Sprocket Talk

[Megadan]

Originally Posted by ProDigit

Truth is truth, bro

Correct. Truth: You're unintelligent, uneducated, and too arrogant for your lack of actual knowledge.

[Megadan]

Anyway, back to an intelligent conversation with people that aren't completely brain dead.

Sorry to have Hijacked your thread fellow large Dan.

[bigdano711]

It's all good, guys. I had a feeling that 14/33 was not gonna do anything for me, so thanks for confirming.


In other news, I have pulled that Nibbi PE28FL and put the stock carb back on. The Nibbi has been leaking fuel right down the intake. Pretty sure since I installed it, although there is a possibility the JJH needle isn't seating properly. I had a tank leak and thought that was it. Turns out it was the Nibbi all along, considering the amount of fuel in the oil.

[Thumper]

Dropping revs with taller gearing is great for road conditions. The limitation, as you are fully aware is wind resistance.

It's nice to have lower revs on the highway, and you can get to pretty amazing speeds with a tail wind!

[bigdano711]

I'm pretty happy where it's at. Megadan was dead nuts in his post where he talks about sprocket ratio/peak torque/speed/rpm. I am very close to his numbers but less because of sprocket choice and my bike is not as hopped up as his. With my 17/47 I can get 53mph in 4th gear fully wound out (7500-8000rpm), even up a pretty decent hill. 5th gear is more like a highway gear that struggles on the highway. On the downhill WITH a tail wind, I can hit 65-70, fully wound out. She cruises pretty good at 60, and that's plenty.

[ProDigit]

Seems like some people can't understand the facts.
Told you they won't admit they're wrong.
I KNOW I'm right. They're just reading textbook BS, without actually understanding the mechanics behind it all...

You keep repeating things without actually proving what I said was wrong.


@Megadan
and of course, the forum troll XLsior, who contributes nothing to the conversation.

[Bill Hilly]

Originally Posted by ProDigit

Seems like some people can't understand the facts.
Told you they won't admit they're wrong.
I KNOW I'm right. They're just reading textbook BS, without actually understanding the mechanics behind it all...

You keep repeating things without actually proving what I said was wrong.


@Megadan
and of course, the forum troll XLsior, who contributes nothing to the conversation.

Thanks for the expert advice. I just added a set of 38/17 sprockets, and shroud around the cylinder and head of my Hawk. I also filled the saddle bags with sand , which along with my 260 lb weight should increase load, as well as temperature. I need to add a Hot air intake, but can't find one, but Honestly it runs like a striped ape, Truthfully??, Well it runs 85 in 4th. To tell the truth, any more than 1/4 throttle,pulls the front wheel in 3rd. When I get that hot air intake on it, it will probably pull it in 5th. And that's the truth.

[Megadan]

Originally Posted by ProDigit

Seems like some people can't understand the facts.
Told you they won't admit they're wrong.
I KNOW I'm right. They're just reading textbook BS, without actually understanding the mechanics behind it all...

You keep repeating things without actually proving what I said was wrong.


@Megadan
and of course, the forum troll XLsior, who contributes nothing to the conversation.

"I KNOW I'm right" is not proof, nor is it a credible source.

You know what is a credible source? Published Textbooks with factually verified referenced information from leading experts in their fields.

Leading Field experts and countless years of tested knowledge and experience vs. what you "know"

Should have stayed in school.

Oh, and XLsior has contributed way WAY more to this forum than you have. Actual good information, both through his own build thread and ideas to just good generally accepted mechanical advice. I would rather have 100 of him to this one version of you.

[ProDigit]

Yet you can't prove I'm wrong, with your text books.
You quote some formulas that make sense on a fixed dyno, but never acknowledged that there are parts that don't apply on what I'm talking about.

According to your formulas nox will not increase HP. Because of your textbook formulas.
You fail to understand what I'm talking about about is outside of your understanding. But oh well...
Keep believing what you want. You're not hurting anyone with it. Except for people who are actually trying to tell you you're actually wrong.

[bigdano711]

ProDigit, you remind me of me 20 years ago. What you post KINDA makes sense and I want to back you or believe you, but I just can't get there. You seem so sure of what you're talking about, but grifters also speak (or type) confidently. Also, you are very antagonistic, which makes you come off as arrogant. Maybe dial that down a little?

Typically, science is repeatable. Have you done any simple testing/experiments to prove your theories? Where did you get your theories?

[ProDigit]

Originally Posted by bigdano711

ProDigit, you remind me of me 20 years ago. What you post KINDA makes sense and I want to back you or believe you, but I just can't get there. You seem so sure of what you're talking about, but grifters also speak (or type) confidently. Also, you are very antagonistic, which makes you come off as arrogant. Maybe dial that down a little?

Typically, science is repeatable. Have you done any simple testing/experiments to prove your theories? Where did you get your theories?

My response is merely one due to a- trolls, and b- misinformation. Doesn't mean that I'm wrong though.

Do a dyno pull in 1st gear and in 6th gear.
You'll see torque is way up in 1st and HP is lower. Meanwhile in 6th HP is up, but torque is lower.
Should be self explanatory.
For anyone not understanding that is the exact same result you're getting as doing the pull with stock gears and with a taller gear setup.

I'm not sure if the process continues indefinitely. Meaning, can't put a 38t on the front and a 15t on the rear and expect better results. But yeah, plug in ideal gearing over stock, and the dyno results will show.

Second, when they use a static dyno, the results are clearly better than on a regular dyno. A regular dyno keeps load constant, while a static dyno keeps rpm (nearly) constant. And you can't load an engine heavier than by keeping rpm constant. A constant load emulates a taller gearing where the engine has a hard time accelerating. The results from such a dyno will show higher HP, than on a regular dyno run, unless the regular dyno run results have been modified to show that discrepancy. In which case they're not going to show the exact HP figures for all bikes (like, they might overread smaller bikes, and underread bigger bikes).

[bigdano711]

Originally Posted by ProDigit

My response is merely one due to a- trolls, and b- misinformation. Doesn't mean that I'm wrong though.

Do a dyno pull in 1st gear and in 6th gear.
You'll see torque is way up in 1st and HP is lower. Meanwhile in 6th HP is up, but torque is lower.
Should be self explanatory.
For anyone not understanding that is the exact same result you're getting as doing the pull with stock gears and with a taller gear setup.

I'm not sure if the process continues indefinitely. Meaning, can't put a 38t on the front and a 15t on the rear and expect better results. But yeah, plug in ideal gearing over stock, and the dyno results will show.

Second, when they use a static dyno, the results are clearly better than on a regular dyno. A regular dyno keeps load constant, while a static dyno keeps rpm (nearly) constant. And you can't load an engine heavier than by keeping rpm constant. A constant load emulates a taller gearing where the engine has a hard time accelerating. The results from such a dyno will show higher HP, than on a regular dyno run, unless the regular dyno run results have been modified to show that discrepancy. In which case they're not going to show the exact HP figures for all bikes (like, they might overread smaller bikes, and underread bigger bikes).

Right off the bat, I know nothing of dyno's or what data is recorded and looked at to figure out HP and torque numbers. I can only deduce that you have poured over dyno data and have come up with a theory (or theories) that is proven by the data?


My original question, which has been satisfactorily answered, was: What is the YouTuber trying to say when he recommends the 14/33 combo? He recommends it over the 17/45. He seems to imply there is more torque or hp where you need it. To me, it just looks like taller gearing, similar to 17/40. Mostly, that's really all it is. However you come in out of left field to try and explain something that I already have a slim comprehension of and completely bamboozle my head. Thanks?

[Megadan]

Originally Posted by bigdano711

Right off the bat, I know nothing of dyno's or what data is recorded and looked at to figure out HP and torque numbers. I can only deduce that you have poured over dyno data and have come up with a theory (or theories) that is proven by the data?


My original question, which has been satisfactorily answered, was: What is the YouTuber trying to say when he recommends the 14/33 combo? He recommends it over the 17/45. He seems to imply there is more torque or hp where you need it. To me, it just looks like taller gearing, similar to 17/40. Mostly, that's really all it is. However you come in out of left field to try and explain something that I already have a slim comprehension of and completely bamboozle my head. Thanks?

You won't convince the lonely narcissist that he is wrong. He can't support his made up BS because it is enirely made up. There is no science, math, or anything of any credible value that supports what he "just knows." Pretty much everything that says he is wrong and full of shit is all of the factual and credible information in the motor vehicle industry.

He has no proof. I already have asked for it multiple times. He just ignores it or tries to use ad hominem, strawman arguments, gaslighting, and red herrings to steer the conversation away from actually having to back up anything he says. He is trying now to convince you of this and is manipulating you through your attempts to be friendly and kind. Trust your gut with him, because it's right. He's a bully with too much ego and no brains.

I trust the rest of the world's 150 years of internal combustion science, engineering, and experience over some wannabe google fueled internet "expert" that can't even get basic mechanical theory correct.

[Thumper]

While it is true that you can optimize the power your engine makes by adjusting the final drive ratio with sprockets for practical purposes, depending on how you use the vehicle. But I don't think it is good to wring out every bit of the 19hp my engine makes. Once in a while, I need it for a short hill climb or something. But only rarely, and only for a few seconds.

Generally, I am using 5 to 15 hp while I ride. Maybe more when I am on the highway. Running an engine at peak power output constantly is a great way to decrease engine life, and it just feels bad! If I need more power, I will buy a bike that makes more horsepower, and run it at ~70-80% of what it can make. Less if it is a larger bike, like my 1200S Bandit or Katana 1100 did. The power was there, but all it did was wear out the rear tire if I kept using it, and launch me to traffic citation velocity real quick!

Sadly, no gearing will change the amount of power an engine makes. You don't see Hayabusas making more than peak horsepower with a sprocket change. It simply does not happen. You would hear all about changing sprockets if it were true. It just isn't. I have no idea how anyone thinks the can increase the horsepower of an engine with the transmission or final drive ratio. It is really ludicrous (meaning so foolish, so unreasonable, or out of place as to be amusing, synonym: ridiculous)

[GypsyR]

Shoot, everybody knows that if you want more free power from a vehicle you just have to put lots of "R-Type" and "Monster Energy" type stickers all over it. SO much horsepowers!