Well as my question was never answered I guess I'll throw a few more things out.

By what I have read the reason for running 15\44 gearing was for better acceleration.

After punching the numbers into this site: http://www.gearingcommander.com/

it spits out this info. Lets use 7200 rpm for comparison

in 4th gear with 15\44 your speed would be 89.2 mph
with 16\43 your speed is 97.4
with 16\41 your speed is 102.2

Now if you are running the higher gearing and downshift the transmission 1 gear you get this:

16\43 = 82.3
16\41 = 86.3

So by these figures, downshifting 1 gear will give you more acceleration (lower top speed = lower gearing) than the 15\44 set up.

Which also means the only place that 15\44 gives better acceleration would be 1st gear. In any other gear, all the bike with higher gearing needs to do is have the transmission in 1 gear lower and it will have better acceleration.

I don't know about your bike but mine will happily flip over backwards in 1st and anytime you lift the front end you actually loose drive so running 15\44 gearing just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

Don’t bullshit me. You don’t really want an answer, you just wanna rattle my cage to entertain yourself, huh.

OK then, my question to you is: Since your bike will happily flip over backwards in first gear, why don’t you raise your gearing to 17/40 so as not to lose any drive by lifting the wheel? haha

I changed to 15/43/520 and, shortly thereafter, when my **** new vortex prematurely distorted its teeth, I impulsively ordered an AFAM 44 to squeeze onto the 100 link chain I cut earlier(wanted to keep the wheel base to shortest possible). I like light unsprung and short wheelbase… rot roh. And yeah, i agree, i am nuts.haha.

Maybe oversimplified thinking(one of my few strengths), but since the stock SH can't hit the rev limiter in sixth, i figured what the hell, let's see if we can hit it with lower gearing. Guess what? We can! Does it matter for all practical purposes? I don’t think so. Anyway, that's how i ended up with a 15/44/520 set up and I'm happy with this configuration so far.

OEM gearing is arguably better for mileage, engine wear, noise reduction, less buzzing, etc., and for highway, touring, and/or relaxed, sedate types of riding since it allows freeway speeds at lower rpms; and I'll concede that OEM gearing is a more practical overall gearing choice for all kinds of riding. But since I do very little highway/touring type and do not necessarily lean on nor toward practicality for its sake, I prefer more spirited sprockets, outrageous acceleration, wheelie prone, rev happy, manic, impractical and whatever other adjectives you may want to ascribe to my 15/44 /520 set-up. This gearing in combination with low unsprung weight, along with the exquisite exhaust note and other visceral properties that favor instinct over intellect, is all that and more and will keep your adrenalin flowing for sure. And that, my friend, to me is the main reason for riding.

What the gearing commander says about all this is interesting for sure, but is of little consequence to me because I'm more about feeling than numbers. That said, if I am interpreting the commander's numbers correctly and my rev limiter is accurate, this set up achieves 160mph, albeit on my secret highspeed testing site which is a long, smooth, slightly downgrade and wide roadway. And, you don’t have to wait too long because it goes right up there. Maybe that little downgrade is cheating a bit, but it's the safest place i've found around here to minimize detection. I've only ever been that fast on my previous 1000 hurricane(reputed 130hp IL4), which was retrofitted with contemporary 3.5 and 5.5 wheels, and I can say that the full-faired Hurricane with its longer wheelbase, smoother engine, heavier chassis, and quieter exhaust was not nearly as exciting as on the SH. You could take your left hand off the grip it was that smooth. And neither were as exciting and scary as a mere 138mph on an unfaired Norton featherbed with legs crossed over the taillight with your chin on a piece of sponge taped to the tank, no helmet and no gear save an old pair of aircraft goggles, and fighting wind wobble as that tach struggles for redline.

That was some scary ****, but not as scary as getting enemas when I was a kid. Now that was some real scary **** that will persist through anybody’s memory loss. haha. Of course you guys don’t know anything about enemas. That’s how many old world mothers cleared infections, bacteria, colds, flubugs or whatever else they thought might be lurking up you *** when you were too sick to go to school. Mom was kinda like the Roto Rooter Man, with that freaking bag, hose and syringe apparatus she used. “Got to get you cleaned out”, she reminded me as I lie naked, face down, legs spread, on a towel spread over the bathroom floor in front of the toilet. And I’m yelling, “but I’m not sick anymore”. Too late! She came. She saw. She conquered………… no stopping her as pumped hot soapy water up my *** like she was curing all the diseases in the world. I don’t even want to talk about it anymore. No wonder I’m always so respectful to cops huh, I ain’t goin to jail thank you; and no wonder the frustrated proc doc commented on my exceptional sphincter strength when he couldn’t get his finger up my ***. haha. It’s like I told him, that’s a one way street and you’re going the wrong way.

Now is that enough “scary **** stories” for ya huh.? Entertaining enough for ya? See what happens when you rattle my cage? Now, lower your gearing, reduce your unsprung weight and get out there and scare the **** out of yourself the good way.haha

 

Yeah that's about right...I mean 0-60 in 2.5 on a superhawk? That's ZX14 territory...Besides gearing you'd probably have to lower the bike (don't) and extend the swingarm (please don't) to get that hard of a launch without flipping over. Since you mentioned a specific number have you clocked yourself with say a g-tech or been down the dragstrip yet? Honestly if that's your game I think there are other bikes better suited to that for the money.

 

Whoa. What just happened...

 

By the way Nath981, I like your spirit! You remind me of a even older guy (71) that I mountain bike with that just will not quit. He will put 99% of the 20 year old's to shame in some extreme descents etc. I've been around real old people when they were 30.
I wasn't going to weigh in on this issue but since everyone else has, I will give you my 2 cents. I personally use the 16/43 and like it a lot. I will go to the 320 chain next year to reduce unsprung weight and faster acceleration. I'm not concerned with longevity either. For the nay sayers, just because you have the same engine speed doesn't mean that the bike will accelerate at the same rate in all gearing. The shorter gearing will always accelerate quicker at any given speed. First gear means nothing at the track and the vast majority of the time I didn't use max throttle on the street. Second and beyond, now that's another story. Now I don't have 115 HP, so I'm not sure what you guys would need.
I do track days with the VTR and that gearing gets me to approximately 8700 RPM on the back straight, all be it a bit it is slow in 5th and 6th because of a up hill portion. I'm looking at changing it to 16/44 to ring the last of the chickens neck on the straight away i.e. 9000 RPM and get better acceleration on the up hill portion. As I've said in other posts, the issue will be engine RPM at various parts of the track that I ride on. Right now I'm usually in the perfect part of the torque range when exiting most all corners with the 16/43 gearing and require little gear shifting through many corners so therefore I have to weight the pros and cons of changing the gearing from many perspectives. The only way to find out is to bring a spare sprocket. More money into the endless pit!
I've reduced a fair amount of unsprung weight and sprung weight this year and that may make a difference as well. I will no doubt have a chance to comment on this at a later date, if only just to get everyone's juices flowing again. As for sprung weight, a simple diet is the cheapest way to go. So far I'm down 5-6 lb (2-3 kg). Maybe I should stop drinking beer but "lord tundering jesus" I like the stuff. OK, no more crazy talk, eh.

 

Actually I am really trying to have a logic based discussion. Even though I get the "He knows everything" comments from time to time, I do enjoy learning as much as I can and a good discussion is the best way to learn.

Well you missed the point here. What I was asking is what do you gain with a lower 1st gear?

Well that is not a problem

You can also hit the rev limiter with a stock motor and 16\43 gearing. In fact with the minor engine mods i have done I would bet I can hit the rev limiter with 16\41 also.

Well you totally missed the point I was trying to make. My example of using the gearing chart was to show that unless you are riding in a place where you are in 1st gear exclusively, you will get better acceleration with 16\43 (or even 16\41) final gearing if you have the transmission one gear lower than a 15\44 set up. The speed numbers were only because I was too lazy to figure out the gear ratios but lower speed at the same RPM equals lower gearing, hence better acceleration.

So if you are in 1st, yes you will have better acceleration potential. Any place else, a higher geared bike will out accelerate your set up just by being 1 gear lower in the gearbox.

It's just basic math, not some sort of attach on you.

 

damn

 

After some time thinking, and the observation of your photo in this site... Less wieght that the bike has to carry.. The faster the acceleration the bike is capable of performing..

 

he called him "gearing commander"

No offence Hawk, I agree your theory is true, and I also think Nath's ideas are right if he likes the outcome for his purposes.

When I replaced my chain/sprockets, I wanted go +2 on my rear sprocket and see how it was with slightly shorter gears. I ordered a 16/43 kit not knowing my bike was running a 15t front sprocket when I bought it, and I ended up with slightly taller gears...It runs good and I like it, but I wonder what it would be like both ways 15/43 and 16/41.

I think the only way to know what you like best is to try a few combinations and see what works best for you

 

haha, thanx for the pat on the back in the spirit department.

beer is good, but not til it's time. I was brought up in a tavern because mom and dad both worked there all the time and so I saw the good and bad. Plus, my grandpap and several uncles were hardcore alcoholics. What I learned from all this exposure is that some people think it's always party time, but the reality is that, if you're partying all the time, there is no party. If you like banana cream pie and eat it breakfast, lunch and supper, it's only a matter of time until it loses its appeal. Since I like to celebrate, I don't want to ruin it by overdoin it.

However, there are times when overdoing it is exactly what the doctor ordered. Overdoing can be a valuable tool for learning because it highlights things that which otherwise might go unnoticed. Relative to motorcycles, this tenet works wonders with things like unsprung weight and gearing changes as well as others like suspension.

Reductions of unsprung weight , of unsprung spinning weight, and of sprung spinning/reciprocating weight, as in lightened engine components, add new dimensions to the feel, handling, and overall performance of most vehicles, but are significantly more so in terms of vehicles that lean, in which case you can't have too much of a good thing. So reducing weight in the above areas cannot be questionable and should be only be limited by your financial constraints.

Use the principle of overdoing it with gearing and you will learn. Again, if you have the bucks, make radical changes and seeing change will be easier. Then there will be no questions and you can always tweak from the extremes. Forget ******* around with 16/44. Go with 15/44 or 16/46, or whatever other extreme configurations you can imagine and you'll find out what works and what doesn't. Even if you need to buy cheap steel until you get it sorted out, then you can buy lighter once your satisfied.

 

I was referring to the real gearing commander below, Hawk is the platoon leader.

http://www.gearingcommander.com/

+1 on the trying some sprockets to find out what's right for you.

 

not necessarily true when you factor in exactly where that weight is located. Heavier gross weight could accelerate faster with lighter unsprung/spinning weight than lighter gross weight with OEM unsprung/spinning components(all other factors being equal). Is there a law in physics that supports/refutes this? Tweety will have to answer that one.haha

 

 

Nath 4 posts in a row? You are definitely not trying to be less annoying are you?
Kind of mucks up otherwise good discussions.

 

you messed things up for my goal of five in a row. haha....If you read instead of just count, you might discover that I was trying to respond to comments based on what i wrote in previous posts. Go back in your hole!

 

Well maybe I'm not explaining things clear enough. I will give this one more try.

It is an American trait to think if a little is good a lot must be better, which is not always the case.

So scenario will show my point better. Also this is for street gearing. Once you hit the track, it is a whole different game.

First you need 2 identical bike with 2 identical riders (So of course this mean it has to be hypothetical )

As I'm not a drag racer, let use possible street setting for this example.

First you equip 1 bike with 15\44 gearing and the other with 16\43 gearing.

Then you have a 15mph hairpin (so you are in 1st gear) followed by a long open section that will allow you to run through the gear box. As you are giving the bike "The Beans" you will run it up to between 8-9k in each gear. Which mean the engine should be between 7-9k throughout this run. As we say "Hauling the mail"

With me so far?

Accelerating at the apex of the hairprin, the bike with 15\44 gearing will have a mechanical advantage, as it has lower gearing. In practical terms it might not be able to accelerate faster than the 16\43 bike as every SuperHawk I have ridden will lift the front end (even with OEM gearing) if you get on it too hard in first. Than was the point behind my "flip over backwards" example.

But for this scenario, let say you have the throttle control of Rossi. Which means at this point the bike with 15\44 gearing has accelerated faster and also hits the first shift point sooner.

This is when everything changes. Now the bike with 16\43 has lower overall gearing, so it is now accelerating faster.

Now as these bike take basically no time to rev from 7-9K the 15\44 equipped bike will be 1 (one) gear higher in the transmission (i.e. As the 15\44 bike goes into 3rd the 16\43 bike is going into 2nd). In each case this gives it higher overall gearing, which means you have less acceleration potential than the 16\43 geared bike.

Add to this the 16\43 has more top end, not that I ever really use it, it is just another added benefit.

This is why the only benefit that I see to justify running 15\44 is the short wheel base. The problem for me is that by adding rear ride height I feel the wheel base has become a bit too short, which is another reason I'm going to try 16\41 gearing at my next sprocket change.

This is my reasoning behind my opinion that 16\41-42-43 (Depending on your riding style and engine mods) is the best performing street gearing.

Saying that the 15\44 gearing feels quicker is understandable if you compare the bikes in the same gear. Though, as I have tried to explain, you will IMHO get better actual performance and acceleration from a higher final drive ratio.

And yes I am done now I just can't think of how to explain it better. Run whatever you want, just think it all the way through before you decide.

 

This is just a thought, perhaps I uneducated, although I have been following along. As I can't really speak from experience:

Larger gearing (16/43) creates a longer time in between shifts. Shifting takes time- no matter how fast you or a computer could do it, it inevitably takes more time than not shifting at all. I am only thinking aloud at this point.

The other thought would be that while you do get to the sweet spot in the HP/Torque curve with smaller gearing (15/44), you are also out of it sooner. Perhaps longer gearing would allow you to use all the torque that is available longer before you have to upshift and start over.

I know that on a bicycle I rarely start on the lowest gear unless I'm on a steep uphill because if I do my legs are spinning so fast so quickly that I have to shift a couple of times before I can use their true power. If I start halfway up the cog I may not have that initial 1/2 second lead but as soon as we're going more than 5 miles per hour I have the advantage as I do not have to shift. And they have enough torque to handle it I envision the same is for a motorcycle...

 

well thanx for the description and all i have to say is that i am very familiar OEM gearing that i ran for 10 years plus as are you. I am also now familiar with my present set up which i have run for several thousand miles, however, you have yet to experience it. So until you have experience with my present set-up, i submit that your thesis could be less than accurate or maybe not. I also like to learn through rational discussion and occasionally this happens for me, but my main learning modality requires hands-on experience.

As you have read, i personally have been reprimanded for using too many posts in a row, maybe 2 or 3 beyond the limit, by our illustrious and recently self-appointed moderator, "smokingjoe73", so I need to capitulate at this point. Maybe you'll be more successful convincing someone with more malleable brain matter. Maybe we'll see you on the power pure thread for some more frivolous mind-******, but please don't tell joe, huh.. haha

 

I read it several times but I still can't understand how the bike with higher gearing actually has lower gearing after the first shift point. This is bogus logic. Sure, for example (and I haven't crunched the numbers), third gear is higher on the shorter geared bike than second is on the longer geared bike, but that doesn't mean that after you shift from second to third that the longer geared bike has shorter gearing. Although you have shifted sooner on the shorter geared bike you have reached a higher road speed and will pick up the next gear in the meat of the powerband. At some point the rider of the longer geared bike will have to upshift and the rider on the shorter geared bike regains the mechanical advantage of shorter gearing. The acceleration advantage of shorter gearing carries all the way through each gear with the longer geared bike having a theoretical advantage only on top speed (and somewhat in first gear because of the tendency to wheelie and/or flip over backwards, a point which I readily concede but I must say that on my favorite roads there is only one corner in which I ever shift all the way down to first, which was also the case with stock gearing), which is debatable, and is certainly not useful for STREET riding.

Gearing is all about tradeoffs. I have a 15/43 setup and have for several years. Before that I had stock gearing for several years. I much prefer the 15/43.

 

So not that we at the racetrack know anything BUT.....Lower gearing does equal faster acceleration. You cannot negate this by saying "just downshift". Downshifting takes time and you have to factor that time in over the whole lap. Not to mention the immediate upshift next required. LOTS of lost drive & therefore acceleration.

So...2 equal bikes next to each other; lower gearing out accelerates taller (at least in the 13 years of racing and shaving of 100dreths of a second off laptimes. Not to mention all the pros I race against and the race mechanics I know.

Street bikes are geared way too high to meet noise regs. The only track I have been to that you can use (almost) stock gearing is daytona. (and the street aint no daytona)

I just took one tooth off the front on the street and like it YMMV.

But hey what could I know?

 

It is kind of funny how first you call it "bogus logic" the show exactly what I am saying.

Try looking at it this way, Say you enter a corner in 3rd gear with 15\44 @6000 RPM which would be right at 62mph. Yes you should get good drive out of the corner.

Though if you ran 16\43 gearing at the same speed in 2nd gear you would be turning 7000 RPM. Also you would have lower overall gearing at this point, even though you have a higher final drive ratio.

So yes gearing is all about trade offs but by your own admission you don't use 1st gear. That is my point, while gearing down a little can be a good thing, don't go so far that you turn your 6 speed gear box into a 5 speed.

Gear these bikes too low and you end up with a 1st gear that is all but unusable and also lose what top end the bike does have. Like I also stated, this is street gearing so it is nice to be able to hit the freeway or cover some miles without the need to wring the bikes neck to do it.

So my point is that by running the bike 1 gear lower in the gear box with higher overall gearing will give you as good, if not better acceleration, plus the added bonus of 6 usable gears in the transmission.

 

And 1 tooth off the front is approx 3 off the back so you have approx 16\44 gearing or right about where I suggested. Now add 2-3 teeth to the rear and see how you like it.......

 

For me I want some hiway smoothness so I dig it like this. I have tried other gearing but wind up back here. My point is that it is simply not as simple as downshifting. If that were true, no one (incl racers) would ever re-gear.. If your logic figures downshifting solves this dilema, you are very mistaken.

 

Joe, you are confusing your self...

You have -1 tooth in the front... That's an almost exact eqivalent to the gearing 8541Hawk suggested, with the only difference you swapped the front sprocket, he swapped the rear...

You still have a semi-usable 1'st gear, but in Hawk's example, you are in fact the bike labeled as "taller" or "longer" geared... Not the other way around...

And yeah, while I agree that it's not "as simple as downshifting" you are missing the point... With a shorter gearing than you now have, you would have a completely useless first gear, so you would have to start rolling in first, then shift to second almost instantly...

Now you roll away in first and can accelerate somewhat without looping the bike... So you are not downshifting... Instead you aren't upshifting unneccesarily soon... Hence you are one gear lower in the gearbox... without downshifting...

Same thing applies when you reach the shiftpoint for 3'rd, 4'th and so, on... The shorter geared bike has already made one shift more, but not really gained much in acceleration...

Obviously there is a penalty in some points of the speed/rev band... Any and all options on gearing will give you that... But the point Hawk is trying to make, and that I happen to agree with, is that going lower than 15/41 or 16/43 on the street will give you very little usable gain in acceleration at the expense of the use of 1'st gear and a noticable top speed loss... In my case with some engine mod's I'm back to stock, and are actually considering going the other way...

And, sorry to disagree, but you are in my opinion 100% wrong on one point...

A lower gearing is not always better... The correct gearing is always better...

Most of the times the two happen to be the same, especially on track... But not always, and on the road it's not that clear cut... I agree with you on the end result in most cases, but the blanket statement is wrong... Sorry...

 

Tweety, "lower" gearing and "taller" gearing are oposites of each other. That got mixed up somewhere.

Also, I can't find where I said lower is always better. But like I said, street bikes are geared tall for noise regs so its unlikely that making the gearing taller would help on the street. Rare exceptions can occur but I can't immediately see why addressing like 1% of situations would help this discussion.

 

Uhm... Seriously now you are confusing me...

I was, and are still quite clear on the fact that "lower" and "taller" are opposite... What I was trying to convey is that you where confusing the issue by saying that you where the lower geared bike, when in fact looking at your current gearing, you will be in Hawks example the higher geared... Or taller, depending on which set of words you choose...

You said, direct quote And I'm saying... No, not always... Not if the gearing is so low that you need to shift unneccesarily... It's not about lowering the gearing, it's about finding the sweet spot where you can use every last bit of acceleration before shifting (and that just happens to apply going the other way as well)... Go to low and you loose effective usage of first...

Yeah, I agree it's unlikely that taller gearing will help on the street... But not impossible... (My case is a bit odd in terms of this discussion, and I'm almost sure I'm at the sweet spot with stock gearing, but I want to confirm it by trying a higher gearing...)

Edit: BTW... I went back and re-read... Now I am confused... Which part where you referring too, and in what order... Argh... Dammit...

 

Oh, BTW Hawk... In answer to a previous "thougth" from you... I can verify that my bike can indeed hit both the redline and the rev-limiter in top gear with stock gearing after my engine modifications... Redline was kind of fun, rev-limiter was less so as was pretty abrubt...

 

Do you have an accurate speedo? You might be doing in the area of 185+mph if the commander is correct. Who needs an R1 huh? Now that would be fun.

yeah that rev limiter..... kinda like a strong miss or carb hiccups.

 

Geez.. I need to clean my laptop. I'm not sure if it was Nath's take on 1940's health care via hose or Geek's "damn", but somewhere in there coffee came out of my nose.

And i'm breathing so much better.

 

none of this matters nemore because
03-18-11 So my bike caught on fire today… « Just a Geek On a Bike