Stock sprocket sizes

Caldsy said:
by going -1 in the front is almost like going +2 on the rear correct? With -1 on the front, does the stock chain still work?

thanks,
Click to expand...

Going -1 in the front is closer to +3 in the rear and yes the stock chain can handle -1 in the front. I can attest to that ;)
 
Perhaps a small chart with those who have made changes and corrected the speedo is in order? How about posting the gearing you have, the healer you've installed and then the correction you've made?

Thanks all!
 
FZ1inNH said:
Perhaps a small chart with those who have made changes and corrected the speedo is in order? How about posting the gearing you have, the healer you've installed and then the correction you've made?

Thanks all!
Click to expand...

Good idea, but the correction factor could vary a small bit depending on whether your rear tire is brand new or worn.

I have 16/45 gearing (-1 in the front) with SpeedoDRD and -10.3% correction factor.
 
Gearing Question

Hi,
I was wondering, does anyone go the opposite way with gearing, such as going down one tooth in the rear to lower the rpm at highway speeds to help with gas economy? I don't know exactly how much it would effect performance but then the engine is rated over 130 hp right? I noticed that at 80 miles per hour it tachs at about 5 grand. I notice a small amount of vibration through the bars that isn't there at a slightly lower rpm. Plus the lower rpm is getting me better gas mileage. Any thoughts on the matter?
Thanks, Kurt
 
Kurt, the motor doesn't really come alive until 7-8K rpm. I'd say you're just cruising at 5K. My old 1400 (well, not that old, '08) c14 would do something like 65 or 70 @ 3500rpm. Talk about geared tall. Unless I was doing 90+, I rarely used 6th gear. With the fz1, I find I spend lots of time in 3rd/4th, and only when on the interstate does it get into 5th or 6th gear for the mpg.

Btw, lower rpm may not equal better mileage. It may very well be burning less fuel, but may also be less efficient...
 
GpZ, Thanks for the response. I am new to this bike having only 350 miles total on it. Until the break in period is over I am keeping the rpms to the recommended levels. I just thought it would be possible to break the 40 miles per gallon mark cruising on the highway and it doesn't do that. Possibly it will improve slightly when it is broken in, only time will tell.
 
kurtwd said:
GpZ, Thanks for the response. I am new to this bike having only 350 miles total on it. Until the break in period is over I am keeping the rpms to the recommended levels. I just thought it would be possible to break the 40 miles per gallon mark cruising on the highway and it doesn't do that. Possibly it will improve slightly when it is broken in, only time will tell.
Click to expand...

You should have no trouble breaking the 40 MPG mark on the highway once the bike is broken in. Obviously you will have to keep your speed in the 65-70 MPH range for this to happen. I would not go -1 in the back simply because this bike has such a tall first gear that it's going to make taking off an exercise in clutch slipping, especially with a passenger. And anyway I doubt you would see much more than 1-2 MPG improvement (if that) with the -1 sprocket out back. Just my :2cents:
 
During some long trips this summer, my mileage ranged anywhere from about 39 to 44. This is with stock gearing and in the mountains.

The mod list includes enlarged airbox, bmc filter, pc3, ign, fce, smaller secondary throttle plates, and custom pc3 map. I wasn't babying it either.
 
GPz1100 said:
Kurt, the motor doesn't really come alive until 7-8K rpm. I'd say you're just cruising at 5K. My old 1400 (well, not that old, '08) c14 would do something like 65 or 70 @ 3500rpm. Talk about geared tall. Unless I was doing 90+, I rarely used 6th gear. With the fz1, I find I spend lots of time in 3rd/4th, and only when on the interstate does it get into 5th or 6th gear for the mpg.

Btw, lower rpm may not equal better mileage. It may very well be burning less fuel, but may also be less efficient...
Click to expand...

I'm not understanding a bit of this. I do understand staying down a couple gears around town, for the sake of being able to keep faster acceleration at-hand, but normally it can pull from top gear pretty well, and keeping up in the higher gears, you have less problem with bumps affecting your throttle position.

But using a higher gear, lower rpm's and therefore less fuel, I don't know how that can be less efficient, unless you're always bogging the engine (too much throttle for the load, uphill, or something like that...)
 
Pyrogenic said:
I'm not understanding a bit of this. I do understand staying down a couple gears around town, for the sake of being able to keep faster acceleration at-hand, but normally it can pull from top gear pretty well, and keeping up in the higher gears, you have less problem with bumps affecting your throttle position.

But using a higher gear, lower rpm's and therefore less fuel, I don't know how that can be less efficient, unless you're always bogging the engine (too much throttle for the load, uphill, or something like that...)
Click to expand...


With regard to the fz1, unless you're over 5K, I don't think the pulling power is all that great in top gear. At 4K, I think it's even weaker. Granted, we're talking 70-80 mph range or higher at that rpm with stock gearing (4K = ~70, 5K =~80 mph). Of course, pulling power is subjective, so what I think is weak may be plenty strong for someone else.

My less efficient remark has more to do with the c14 than the fz1. On that bike, putzing around at 3500-4K (which is plenty strong after the flies are removed and proper map (85 ft lb torque @ 3K rpm), yielded poorer mpg than doing the same speeds a gear or two lower and 500-1000 rpm higher. I can't say the same is true on the fz1 because I rarely if ever ride below 4K, and usually somewhere around 5K+ when on the twisty back roads.

I hope this makes more sense?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top