So I figured why not. For $12 on Amazon, I purchased a JT 18T sprocket for my bike. After about 100 miles today I decided I would give a decent little write up since there hasn't been much, and any other relative posts are at least 2 years old. This is done on a 1990 GS.
Goals for this morning were:
1. Mount new 18T sprocket
2. Clean & lube chain
3. Clean out side cover (it was yucky)
4. Re-adjust clutch
So the swap of the sprocket was easy. Pop off old 16T, shove wheel forward (a lot), and then tighten it all up again. Yes, the sprocket clears the shift rod. It is deceptive though, looks REALLY close, but there is almost 6mm (1/4") between them. This is the one I ordered:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0068OCV0E/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
or if the link goes bad: JT Sprocket JTF565.18
This is the sprocket you need up to a 1994 I believe. Be safe, and check what you have first, there are a few different ones. Mine has no hub, it's flat, that is important. Others have a step, or hub, and that is required. Find out what is on yours first. If you need the stepped hub version:
http://www.jcwhitney.com/1990-2002-suzuki-motorcycle-gs500/motorcycle-sprocket/p3067786d58770y1990-2002j1.jcwx
I figured from what I had read thus far, that I could expect take offs to be a bit slower, but my gears would be longer, and my RPM's lower. This was my whole reason, I want better mileage. Once out of the driveway I noticed 2 things immediately. First, the bike took off! I was expecting to slip the clutch a bit, or have to roll into a fast take off. Little did I know the old girl just wanted to run! This may be due to a freshly adjusted clutch, I'm sure it is, but it didn't act at all like the 2nd gear take off I expected. The next thing I realized very quickly, was the apparent "extra gear" I had gained. Figuratively. On the 16T I would cruise through town 35mph, around 3500-4K, in 4th, now I was in 3rd. Wind it up, I'm cruising in 5th at 60, running about 4K, not 6th like I used to. Now keep in mind, this is a 23 year old bike. After a few miles, I started to test it out a little harder. I did rolling high speed take offs. Cruise 40-45, punch it to 75. This also seemed to do the exact opposite of expected. I figured rolling along at 3500 I would have to shift to really take off, but nope. While it's not in it's proper powerband, she pulled real hard! My digital speedo was skipping large chunks of numbers until i realized I was running almost 80, in 5th.
A few other bonuses, I'm not shifting mid intersection, the buzzy higher RPMs are all but gone, and the general pull from shift to shift seems a lot smoother. I honestly, in my lone opinion, think this is how the GS should have been geared from the start. I do think the clutch adjustment matters heavily here though, if adjusted well, and tight, there is no slipping and everything is very smooth. I highly recommend people do this. Is there a loss of some take-off speed? Maybe, but I did not notice it...hell, I can still beat cars.
The testing info:
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y217/Soloratov/Black%20Pearl/85128139-4c4e-4ef6-809a-a7049196bdd1.jpg) (http://s6.photobucket.com/user/Soloratov/media/Black%20Pearl/85128139-4c4e-4ef6-809a-a7049196bdd1.jpg.html)
All information is based on US MPG
All speeds were taken from my digital speed & with GPS
All RPM's are based on watching digital tach throughout the riding, so it's close
1990 GS500 E
K&N Drop in
Stock Exhaust
200lb Rider
16T Sprocket:
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y217/Soloratov/GearingEngineSpeedmph.jpg) (http://s6.photobucket.com/user/Soloratov/media/GearingEngineSpeedmph.jpg.html)
Gearing speeds @ 6000 RPM (provided by GSwiki)
1st= ~26mph
2nd= ~38mph
3rd= ~47mph
4th= ~59mph
5th= ~69mph
6th= ~78mph
Tank 1: 47mpg - Mixed Riding - Avg Speed: 55mph - Avg. RPM: 5500
Tank 2: 49mpg - Mixed Riding - Avg Speed: 55mph - Avg. RPM: 5500
Tank 3: 41mpg - 1/2 Mixed - 1/2 Highway Riding - Avg. Speed: 70mph - Avg. RPM: 6500
18T Sprcket:
Tank 1: 53mpg - 2/3 Highway Riding - Avg Speed: 75mph - Avg. RPM - 5000
Tank 2: 57mpg - Mixed Riding - Avg Speed: 60mph - Avg RPM: 4000
Tank 3: 51mpg - AGGRESSIVE Riding/ Highway - Avg Speed: 70mph - Avg RPM: 5500
Final Review Data:
Avg MPG 16T: 45.6 MPG
Avg MPG 18T: 53.6 MPG
Adjusted speeds 18T @ 6000RPM:
1st: ~34
2nd: ~45
3rd: ~ 56
4th: ~67
5th: ~76
6th: ~85
This is a definitive increase in mileage over stock gearing to me. I tried to cover the entire range of riding styles from conservative to aggressive. Does this mean I am saving a lot of money...no, it means something far more important to me...RANGE. It means I get 30 more miles per tank than I did before. That's an extra trip to work, and extra 30 to cruise the back roads and get lost, less worry about where the next fill up is. In general, the RPM range for cruising was lower, but more noticeable was the much longer gears...longer between shifts. This is nice for cruising, and I always hated shifting mid-intersection. In the end it's preference, and you can decide based on the numbers, but I will be keeping the bike geared this way until it dies!
Now for the hiccup. I removed the side cover for the clutch cable, and when I went to clean it...wow. Apparently, at some point it went WAY, WAY out of spec, and the chain had actually eaten part of the arm that the clutch cable pulls on. To the point where it was so thin I could bend it with my finger. Thats 2 creepy incidents in the last month...damn thing. Anyway, i had a spare cover with all the guts so I just swapped them. I am not sure when this happened, since I never felt, or heard anything. So it's a fair warning, make sure your clutch is properly adjusted...that arm is VERY close to the chain when it's all put together.
:thumb: .. Good info!
... Edit ... So still stock rear and no chain change?
Still stock rear, and no chain change. Rear wheel is still well within the adjustment range, so that's not an issue, just moved forward almost 3 notches.
Quote from: Soloratov on June 01, 2013, 06:53:05 PM
Now for the hiccup. I removed the side cover for the clutch cable, and when I went to clean it...wow. Apparently, at some point it went WAY, WAY out of spec, and the chain had actually eaten part of the arm that the clutch cable pulls on. To the point where it was so thin I could bend it with my finger. Thats 2 creepy incidents in the last month...damn thing. Anyway, i had a spare cover with all the guts so I just swapped them. I am not sure when this happened, since I never felt, or heard anything. So it's a fair warning, make sure your clutch is properly adjusted...that arm is VERY close to the chain when it's all put together.
This clutch cam and push rod design may have been the stupidest ever in the freaking history of suzuki and in deed the world.
You have a chain jump or break or something and you're left with a clutch that wont work os you ate the cam or broke the rod. Yeaaaaay more parts you gotta buy. Garbage design.
Of course the clutch being on the right side they could just have slapped that arm and pinion style on it they put on every other bike. Idiots. Unneccesarily complicating things.
Cool.
Buddha.
"This was my whole reason, I want better mileage."
So....what was your mileage before the gear change..and what is is after?
Cookie
well...it's only been 1 day...so, I have no idea what my mileage is yet. I want at least 3 tanks to get a decent average mileage, but for now:
16T = Avg. 46-52 mpg.
Soloratov,
What year is your bike? The wiki lists the JTF565 for years up to 1993 but 1994 and up it lists the JTF516 which isn't available in a 17 or 18 tooth (according to the JT website).
Does anyone know if the difference is just the flange and if it matters that much?
"This clutch cam and push rod design may have been the stupidest ever in the freaking history of suzuki and in deed the world."
(http://www.motohouston.com/forums/images/smilies/laughing6.gif)
Did moving the rear wheel forward raise your rear end at all? That would be another plus in my book.
I modified my post.
Bike is a 1990. The sprocket is the flat design, look at what you are taking off to be sure which you need.This is a very important thing to check, the wrong one, and it will be loose, or not fit at all.
As far as the rear end, I didn't notice. The whole wheel only moved 2 notches, so, 1/2" maybe. Not really enough to change anything, especially once you sit on it. By moving the wheel forward, if anything, it would lower the bike a little.
So...........
With my standard sprocket...I get 60 to 65 MPG.........Occasional up to 70...........
I can't see the gearing mattering a bit...unless you make really long drives at sustained high speeds...like 75 mph or so.........
I spend a fair amount of time in 5th gear....sixth for sustained higher speeds.....only when I get to 80 MPH would I think of needing a higher gear.........and I don't really ride more than a minute or so at that speed......
But if fuel mileage is your goal...then riding fast is the best way to ruin that goal.........
Well let us know how it works out........
Cookie
Quote from: Soloratov on June 03, 2013, 08:48:54 AM
well...it's only been 1 day...so, I have no idea what my mileage is yet. I want at least 3 tanks to get a decent average mileage, but for now:
16T = Avg. 46-52 mpg.
I ride 75 miles a day to and from work, all expressway, so sustained higher speeds are not really negotiable.
How would gearing NOT matter? I effectively cut my rpm's in half....
One thing I noticed reading endless posts about fuel economy, no one, anywhere seems to really get the same thing. This bike seems to have it's own specific standards for every rider. Rider weight, temp, elevation, stock vs upgraded, all kinds of things. I look on Fuelly and the numbers are all over. I'm trying to provide the information based on the change, and the change alone, not the specific numbers.
while i do think gearing plays a part ... and i intend to do this 18T thing also!! ... mainly to 'move' my freeway cruising rpm lower..
with any gearing its ALL about how you use the gears and throttle .. and how that will affect fuel consumption ..
one of my fav vids to show the eco-warriors :icon_twisted: ... mainly the second half .. but its all interesting :thumb:
That's a great episode!
I agree with the "what you do with it" statement. It's tough for me. I'm a relatively easy going kind of rider, but there are plenty of times I like to get on it and wind it up. Tough to go a whole tank conservatively for me :) A lot of Jeremy running through my yank veins. I think for me, the greatest advantage to the 18 is the longer gears...especially 1st and second.
finding an 18t with the flange for my k6 is proving a bit of a challenge... JT or otherwise .. :icon_neutral:
I'm wondering if you could get the non flanged version, and just add a spacer/washer of some kind. Flange just takes up space, so I don't see why not. If you weren't on the other side of the world I would offer to make you a spacer.
thanks for the offer :thumb:
from what i understand though .. the flange is not just there to make it wider... its to provide extra surface area on the splines and therefore limit 'wiggle' ... a spacer would be a good solution .. if it were also the 13spline toothed and bonded to the sprocket .. sigh
edit ... mmmhhhrrrrrmmmm .. however... stock 16/39 gives you 2.43 .... your 18/39 gives you 2.16 ratio... nothing (i have any more patience to look for) on the JT site goes plus front/minus rear ... enough .. to give that ratio....
however ... at risk of seeming to have more money than sense... Chain Gang Sprockets offer the following (down near bottom of page) a 17/38 setup .. which gives 2.23 .. still a bit high for the purposes of keeping to the 18/39 theory
but... after a phone call... he can indeed do a 17/37 set .. which gives a 2.17ratio .. close enough for me!..
he also reccomends using a DID ZVM chain ... with the CG sprockets... and claims with good chain maintenance the combo will give up to 3 times the life of 'normal oem' gear .. he sounds like a reasonable sort of chap...
just dont ask me the cost overall.... :icon_eek: its ummm.... :icon_rolleyes: welll .. i might just order the chain from o/s i think... try and minimise that part of the cost.... still... if it gives me 3 times the life? ...
and Chain Gang are Aussie Made!! .. fair dinkum! :thumb:
http://www.chaingangchainsandsprockets.com.au/suzuki-specs/up-to-500cc.html
I find this a very interesting experiment, do keep us informed. I am currently running a 15 and it really gets very buzzy at 60 not to mention 70 or 80!
Quote from: Soloratov on June 03, 2013, 08:47:59 PM
I'm wondering if you could get the non flanged version, and just add a spacer/washer of some kind. Flange just takes up space, so I don't see why not. If you weren't on the other side of the world I would offer to make you a spacer.
I used 3 Sprocket Specialist replacement sprockets on my 97 GS that did not have the hub over a period of approx 40k miles. I questioned SS about it and they said the front sprocket would be located by the chain and rear sprocket and would run OK without spacers or hub. This turned out to be true and every time I opened the sprocket cover the front sprocket was located right next to the retaining clip in perfect alignment.
I put same type SS sprocket on my 02 GS with the first chain replacement and ran it all winter with the rear wheel a bit out of alignment and when I checked the front sprocket in the spring it wobbled a bit on the shaft. Turned out the sprocket spline bore was worn excessively but the shaft was OK and I went back to sprockets with the hubs after that. So the hubless sprockets will work but the ones with the hub are better, must be the reason why Suzuki made the design change to add the hub back around 1993.
http://www.gs500.net/gallery/data/500/GSbrakeschains.jpg
Added 16T info and first tank on 18T to end of first post.
WOW!!! 75 MPH average speed......so you must of been going like 90 MPH at times????
OK.... you need that bigger gear for sure!
But funny thing.........your "stock" speed/rpm does not match up with mine...I say I'm about 500 rpm less than you .......
The 75 MPH cruising at 5000 RPM might be nice if you go that fast often
I seldom get over 60 mph except for short spurts
So going in the 55 MPH to 60 MPH range (GPS speed not indicated on the stock speedo) puts me in the 5000 rpm to 5500 rpm range...the engine seems happy there.......If I go any much slower I shift down to 5th....
Cookie
Cookie
Quote from: Soloratov on June 01, 2013, 06:49:31 PM
The testing info:
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y217/Soloratov/Black%20Pearl/85128139-4c4e-4ef6-809a-a7049196bdd1.jpg) (http://s6.photobucket.com/user/Soloratov/media/Black%20Pearl/85128139-4c4e-4ef6-809a-a7049196bdd1.jpg.html)
All information is based on US MPG
All speeds were taken from my digital speed & with GPS
All RPM's are based on watching digital tach throughout the riding, so it's close
1990 GS500
K&N Drop in
Stock Exhaust
200lb Rider
16T Sprocket:
Tank 1: 47mpg - Mixed Riding - Avg Speed: 55mph - Avg. RPM: 5500
Tank 2: 49mpg - Mixed Riding - Avg Speed: 55mph - Avg. RPM: 5500
Tank 3: 41mpg - 1/2 Mixed - 1/2 Highway Riding - Avg. Speed: 70mph - Avg. RPM: 6500
18T Sprcket:
Tank 1: 53mpg - 2/3 Highway Riding - Avg Speed: 75mph - Avg. RPM - 5000
I average anywhere from 70-80 mph the entire way to and from work. I live 1/2 mile from the expressway, and work is about 100 yards off the exit, so yeah....it's a long, fast ride.
Keep in mind, your speedo is a percentage off...mine is exact. I also have the digital tach that reads the coil, so that may have an difference as well. When I had the stock gauges, with stock gears, I swore that at 60, in 6th, my bike spun at 6K RPM. As soon as I was reading actual wheel speed and RPM from coil, that changed drastically.
Well, maybe my tach is "off" but I use GPS for speed.........I also figured the "error" of the stock speedo at 8% so I account for this too if I don't happen to have the GPS......
80 "true" MPH on a GS 500 on the expressway is sure not my idea of fun...to each his own...
For more "normal riding" ...which I consider to be in the 50 to 65 MPH range...I don't see any advantage in gear ratio change ....For what you are doing, which I consider to be "sustained high speed"...I can see the advantage of bigger gear ratio...dropping the cruise RPM...and possibly getting better mileage..........
But 80 MPH and good mileage are directly opposed to each other...so you have to consider a "relative improvement"..........
I ride fairly long distance to work on weekends...80 miles each way...but pretty much sustained 50 to 55 mph.....(county roads, no expressway).....In stock 6 th gear.....65 miles per gallon is typical...but occasionally over 70 MPG........I can easily run the mileage down into the 50's by driving faster and accelerating more.....
Remember drag is the square of the speed...so 80 MPH has 4 times the drag of 40 mph.......
Horsepower required is the cube of the speed...so if you need 5 HP to go 40 mph...you need 40 HP to go 80 MPH.....gas economy goes down as speed goes up.........Gearing can only make the whole deal a bit more efficient at certain speed/rpm combos..
For what you are doing....gears 1 thru 5 make no difference in mileage at all...it is the 6th gear ratio which matters at those high sustained speeds........
Cookie
Quote from: Soloratov on June 05, 2013, 05:27:23 PM
I average anywhere from 70-80 mph the entire way to and from work. I live 1/2 mile from the expressway, and work is about 100 yards off the exit, so yeah....it's a long, fast ride.
Keep in mind, your speedo is a percentage off...mine is exact. I also have the digital tach that reads the coil, so that may have an difference as well. When I had the stock gauges, with stock gears, I swore that at 60, in 6th, my bike spun at 6K RPM. As soon as I was reading actual wheel speed and RPM from coil, that changed drastically.
But my question is, what model/year are you riding? A newer F model would absolutely get higher mileage.
I have an old E. Wind resistance is...inevitable. As far as riding style, I do a lot of just cruising around to, but I'll ride around in 6th anywhere from 45 mph and up. Ever since I bought the bike, I have never understood how anyone could get over 60 mpg, stock gearing. Even times I granny drive, I couldn't see that happening. Remember, I stated it in my info...sustained higher speeds are only when I'm going to work. Everything else is 55-60, so it's not a speed issue.
I'll dedicate this weekends tank of gas to you. 8) I'll get 100 miles of leisure in there, see what I can get.
Quote from: Soloratov on June 05, 2013, 05:27:23 PM
I average anywhere from 70-80 mph the entire way to and from work. I live 1/2 mile from the expressway, and work is about 100 yards off the exit, so yeah....it's a long, fast ride.
I am constantly going 75-80 mph at like 6k rpm on I5, would you recommend the 18T sprocket? And have you checked to see what your top speed is now? How much does it even improve?
Top speed...actual? Theoretically it improves, but there is really no way this little 500 could ever reach it's "top speed". I have never taken it much over 90, so I couldn't answer that. As far as the swap, for the higher highway speeds, the main improvement has just been the buzzy vibration. It's a lot smoother at the higher speeds, so more comfort for the longer rides, less hand irritation as well.
OK more good points...
My bike is an 2009 F.......two things here...one, Maybe the fairing offers slightly less aerodynamic drag......I doubt it though...some say the fairing acts like an air scoop and actually increases drag...hmmm.
Second..........the later models have a three stage carburetor...earlier are two stage......I have also heard that the later bikes come from the factory set up to run on the very lean side.......
Actually though, my spark plugs are nice color, so I am not running excessive lean....
Tires make a difference too....I still did good mileage on the stock battleax tires..but now I run on Avon... fairly hard tire.......and I keep the pressure up to spec...
Yet another possibility for better mileage...I have clubman bars..so I sit a bit lower and flatter on the bike.
To achieve better gas mileage, IMHO, requires many, many little factors which all add up and contribute.....not that one change will suddenly give you great mileage.
When you come right down to it, mileage is pretty much elementary....Just one big...equation....
Weight of the bike....drag....speed..acceleration, wind, hills...etc...It takes a certain amount of power to do this..no more, no less....The power comes from the fuel....So you are gonna use the same fuel to do the same work....
All you can hope for with gearing to to avoid waste...in effect getting the optimum efficiency...Since with gears 2 thru 5, you can up shift or down shift, these ratios don't matter....you can choose the optimum shift points for maximum efficiency....Gear one really doesn't matter much since you use it only to get started from a dead stop...actually a lower gear one might improve mileage...but this is insignificant........So it is only gear six that matters....IF you travel at high speeds.....
In a much earlier discussion we came up with dyno charts of the power curve at various shift points....basically this curve follows the theoretical curve you would get with a theoretical perfect CVT...continuously variable transmission.......(or you could say infinite number of gears)...
But the actual curve is so close to the theoretical that it again shows that only gear one ..and gear 6 actually change anything....and again gear one is used only to get started ...so it is gear 6 that matters.......
So, long winded to say.....you want to optimize gear six to fit your cruise speed.......
I would estimate that stock gear six is optimized for maybe 60 to 70 MPH........If you're gonna cruise at 80 to 85 a higher gear would be more optimized for fuel mileage........(speed and or acceleration however, is a different story....this is where some opt for LOWER gearing!!)
Cookie
Quote from: Soloratov on June 05, 2013, 07:32:52 PM
But my question is, what model/year are you riding? A newer F model would absolutely get higher mileage.
I have an old E. Wind resistance is...inevitable. As far as riding style, I do a lot of just cruising around to, but I'll ride around in 6th anywhere from 45 mph and up. Ever since I bought the bike, I have never understood how anyone could get over 60 mpg, stock gearing. Even times I granny drive, I couldn't see that happening. Remember, I stated it in my info...sustained higher speeds are only when I'm going to work. Everything else is 55-60, so it's not a speed issue.
I'll dedicate this weekends tank of gas to you. 8) I'll get 100 miles of leisure in there, see what I can get.
Getting the max top speed, vs getting best fuel mileage at high speed are going to require different thought process..........
For best mileage at a given cruise speed....we want the engine to be operating at its most efficient RPM...this will be a relatively low RPM........We should choose the gearing as appropriate...This would be relatively high gear ratio...and the engine will be producing relatively low HP...
For the fastest possible top speed, flat out.....we need the engine to produce the max possible Horsepower....This comes near or at redline..........If we go with too high of gearing.....the engine will be bogged down, and never reach redline......the top speed will be too slow........If we go with too low of gearing the engine will hit redline, before the top sped of the bike is reached......there is a perfect middle ground here where the bike hits its max possible top speed jsut as the RPM its the max HP point.....
At this configuration, the fuel economy would be about the worst it could possibly be......Wide open throttle, almost redline RPM...high speed...maximum drag....
Cookie
Quote from: Soloratov on June 05, 2013, 08:53:46 PM
Top speed...actual? Theoretically it improves, but there is really no way this little 500 could ever reach it's "top speed". I have never taken it much over 90, so I couldn't answer that. As far as the swap, for the higher highway speeds, the main improvement has just been the buzzy vibration. It's a lot smoother at the higher speeds, so more comfort for the longer rides, less hand irritation as well.
Exactly. Main reason I never have gotten over 90, not that I want to, is more for the fact of at 90, on an E Model, it's like riding down the road with a parachute attached to my back. Remember, this is all relative to the rider. All I can provide is the difference I get with my riding style and my bike. Everyone gets something different.
I would agree to some degree on the only 1st and 6th mattering, but at the same time, effectively adding another gear (compared soley to a 16t) it basically lowers the operating RPM in ALL gears by roughly 1500. Now consider how much fuel is used at idle over the course of, say an hour and half...roughly how long it would take to go 100 miles. That's the amount of fuel I am saving over the course of a tank, because at any given speed I am now one gear lower, at a lower RPM. This is just me though, thats my riding style. I have always owned cruisers, so I have always shifted to the next gear early at a lower RPM. Instead of shifting around 6-7K I have always shifted around 4-5.
You made the perfect point, it's all dependent on the person and how they ride. Lets face it, Johnny Rocket next door that wants to do 100, will never get good mileage. All i am trying to do is provide objective numbers based on my previous numbers. Let others decide. When I look around Fuelly, everyone will an early E model gets roughly the same mid-high 40's, occasional low 50's. These are the people who can benefit from my research. 8)
This is a common fallacy.....
Changing the ratios on gears 2,3,4,5 does not change the operating RPM of those gears...........
YOU choose the operating RPM.....
For example I could use my stock gearing and shift up at 4000 RPM....or I could shift up at 5500 or I could sift up at 7500...the rider chooses the shift point, not the gear.........
You have to think of the six gears as one continuous curve...it is not a perfect curve, but really close ....
The power curve which would give you the max speed and acceleration would be having the shift points at or close to redline.
The power curve which would give the best fuel economy would have the shift points at a much lower RPM...........
But in either case above.....No matter what the actual gear ratios are, (within reason) the body of the respective power cure will look exactly the same! The speeds at the shift points will be different, but the curve will look exactly the same...except for a tiny part at the beginning of the curve, and the tiny part at the end of the curve.....
Cookie
Quote from: Soloratov on June 06, 2013, 05:55:21 AM
I would agree to some degree on the only 1st and 6th mattering, but at the same time, effectively adding another gear (compared soley to a 16t) it basically lowers the operating RPM in ALL gears by roughly 1500.
8)
Yeah, that's true...I can see your point there. Well...fine. Then...I'm still sticking with longer gears, and lower 6th gear RPM. :cool: Going to be miserable and rainy here for a few days, but should get some more numbers up this weekend. I want to see if I can hit the magic 60 just cruising around, exploring the back roads.
Quote from: twocool on June 06, 2013, 04:57:13 AM
For the fastest possible top speed, flat out.....we need the engine to produce the max possible Horsepower....This comes near or at redline.........
Theoretical top speed at redline of a stock GS500 in 6th gear is 140 mph, actual top speed is in the 100-110 mph range. Max HP is produced at 8500 rpm which would be at about 108 mph in 6th close to published road test top speed results but not too close to the GS500's 11,000 rpm redline.
http://www.gs500.net/gallery/data/500/GS500tests.jpg
Quote from: Soloratov on June 06, 2013, 05:55:21 AM
Exactly. Main reason I never have gotten over 90, not that I want to, is more for the fact of at 90, on an E Model, it's like riding down the road with a parachute attached to my back.
LOL, the only time I ever got to top speed or close to it was on my 97 GS in the mountains of upstate NY 10 years ago with a barn door size Plexi 2 shield on it. I hit 110 mph indicated which might have been an honest 100 mph and I've used a smaller Spitfire shield for summers ever since.
After approx 175,000 miles on my 97 and 02 GSs I'm convinced the stock 16/39T gearing is best for me, your needs may vary. I've got a consistant 60-65 mpg overall including dropping to 50-55 mpg winters and for 70-80 mph indicated Interstate days and when running at 7-9k rpm for hours in the mountains.
Somewhere on the site it was suggested you could use an 18tooth 520 conversion front sprocket for a GSXR1000.
The 18t front sprocket we put on the '07 GS500F we had was made by Afam.
I don't think the effect on gas mileage is going to be significant for everyone. What I liked most about changing the gearing was that the bike no longer felt like it was working harder than it needed to at 60+ mph
I'm expecting an average of about 5-7 mpg increase. On a bike, it may not be significant enough to get excited, but think of it in term of a car. An extra 5 would be awesome! I'm just enjoying the very noticeable difference in the feel of the bike.
GSJack - It's one reason I like living where I do, a lot of nice places to ride, and the Adirondacks are only a few hours away. Not sure I could ever allow myself to put a windscreen on a bike, but the advantages are great!
Quote from: SAFE-T on June 06, 2013, 08:08:12 AM
I don't think the effect on gas mileage is going to be significant for everyone. What I liked most about changing the gearing was that the bike no longer felt like it was working harder than it needed to at 60+ mph
^ What that guy said. I'm currently running the stock 16/39 setup but am in the process of ordering a new chain and sprockets. I wasn't sure I really wanted to change the front sprocket up a tooth because I felt like I could possibly be losing a lot of low end power. I have decided to try a Sunstar 33317 17-tooth front sprocket to see if it will make my highway riding more bearable. I am hoping that the 17-tooth will be a good compromise because I feel that the bike struggles between 70-80mph and I typically ride interstates at those speeds.
I personally couldn't find an 18-tooth made for anything past 1993 but I'm not sure if I really dug that deep in the sprocket world.
18T sprocket for '94 and up at bottom of the page
http://www.jcwhitney.com/1990-2002-suzuki-motorcycle-gs500/motorcycle-sprocket/p3067786d58770y1990-2002j1.jcwx
By theoretical top speed I am guessing you mean redline RPM in sixth gear.........This would be disregarding the aerodynamic drag (and other drag)
If the bike hits 108 mph flat out in sixth gear... but can't get past 8500 rpm.....then the gear ratio is too high for max possible top speed......A (slightly) lower gear would allow the engine to spin up to redline, thus producing more horsepower and (slightly)more speed.........)
Max HP comes just a little before redline, I believe.......for max acceleration you should SHIFT at redline though..
The problem lies in the fact that drag is the square of the speed.........and horsepower required is the cube of the speed.........so you basically "hit the wall" no matter what you do........
But all of the above has to do with performance, as in speed...not economy.....
So running higher gear (6th) can improve economy at typical high speed cruise.........
But again I stress that the stock gearing is pretty darn good over a wide range of driving conditions...........To me the only advantage of higher gear is if you consistently cruise in the 85 MPH range for long periods of time.........Engine is turning slower, economy is slightly better....bike might be slightly more comfortable with less vibration.....etc.
What is the actual fuel economy gain? I bet not really significant! When you figure the cost savings of like one or two MPG over the life of the bike it is really too small to matter much....
An if you really want or need fuel economy there are other ways.......aerodynamics would be big...as would be driving style..... limiting WOT...lowering weight etc....
in the big picture my GS gets roughly twice the mileage of my car...and my car gets pretty good mileage..........so I am happy and don't see the need for modification for my driving...
Cookie
But this whole range is not really important in normal driving
Quote from: gsJack on June 06, 2013, 08:00:12 AM
Theoretical top speed at redline of a stock GS500 in 6th gear is 140 mph, actual top speed is in the 100-110 mph range. Max HP is produced at 8500 rpm which would be at about 108 mph in 6th close to published road test top speed results but not too close to the GS500's 11,000 rpm redline.
Quote from: twocool on June 06, 2013, 04:57:13 AMFor the fastest possible top speed, flat out.....we need the engine to produce the max possible Horsepower....This comes near or at redline..........
Quote from: twocool on June 06, 2013, 12:05:03 PMBy theoretical top speed I am guessing you mean redline RPM in sixth gear.........This would be disregarding the aerodynamic drag (and other drag)
If the bike hits 108 mph flat out in sixth gear... but can't get past 8500 rpm.....then the gear ratio is too high for max possible top speed......A (slightly) lower gear would allow the engine to spin up to redline, thus producing more horsepower and (slightly)more speed.........)
Max HP comes just a little before redline, I believe.......for max acceleration you should SHIFT at redline though..
I'm talking about a
stock GS500 which does hit the approx 108 mph top speed at the max HP which is the point I was making, Suzuki got it right, and it is as you said:
For the fastest possible top speed, flat out.....we need the engine to produce the max possible Horsepower. But this happens at 8500 rpm on a
stock GS500 long before the 11.000 rpm redline and so max acceleration can be had shifting at 9-9.5k rpm. Doing so drops the rpm about 2k rpm to the top of the torque curve at approx. 7000 rpm. That's why I refer to running at 7-9k rpm for max performance on stock GS shifting up and down to keep it there. Typical dyno curve for a stock GS looks like this:
(http://www.gs500.net/gallery/data/500/MikesGS500dynoRuns.jpg)
Do a good job of modifying intake, exhaust, and jetting and you can extend the power peak close to the redline like John did on Annie's GS:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v443/jcp8832/AnniesGS500dynoRun-1.jpg)
OK... right...so if the max HP is at 8500...and WOT in sixth gear gives you 8500, the gearing is just about perfect...........(unless you want to use 6th like an overdrive and cruise at relatively high speed with lower RPM........Again "performance" and "economy are at odds.
Once you get the bike moving from a stop...you can upshift at any RPM you desire..this is why the "middle gears" don't really matter.....
The power curve is kinda flat up there around 8500 ...so a bit more or less RPM really doesn't matter........
yes you want to be way above the max HP RPM when you shift up...so that you are still in the power band once in the new higher gear........
There are many articles on this....some conclude that you should run all the way to redline before shifting.
If you shift and the rpm drops to 7000...you are too low on the power band.....You want to be close to 8500 AFTER the upshift........but this is for max acceleration.....
I shift anywhere between 5000 and 6500 unless I'm in a hurry.......I have never had my bike anywhere near redline....since I have nowhere to go, I don't need to get there fast..
Cookie
Quote from: gsJack on June 06, 2013, 01:52:48 PM
Quote from: twocool on June 06, 2013, 04:57:13 AMFor the fastest possible top speed, flat out.....we need the engine to produce the max possible Horsepower....This comes near or at redline..........
Quote from: twocool on June 06, 2013, 12:05:03 PMBy theoretical top speed I am guessing you mean redline RPM in sixth gear.........This would be disregarding the aerodynamic drag (and other drag)
If the bike hits 108 mph flat out in sixth gear... but can't get past 8500 rpm.....then the gear ratio is too high for max possible top speed......A (slightly) lower gear would allow the engine to spin up to redline, thus producing more horsepower and (slightly)more speed.........)
Max HP comes just a little before redline, I believe.......for max acceleration you should SHIFT at redline though..
I'm talking about a stock GS500 which does hit the approx 108 mph top speed at the max HP which is the point I was making, Suzuki got it right, and it is as you said: For the fastest possible top speed, flat out.....we need the engine to produce the max possible Horsepower. But this happens at 8500 rpm on a stock GS500 long before the 11.000 rpm redline and so max acceleration can be had shifting at 9-9.5k rpm. Doing so drops the rpm about 2k rpm to the top of the torque curve at approx. 7000 rpm. That's why I refer to running at 7-9k rpm for max performance on stock GS shifting up and down to keep it there. Typical dyno curve for a stock GS looks like this:
(http://www.gs500.net/gallery/data/500/MikesGS500dynoRuns.jpg)
Do a good job of modifying intake, exhaust, and jetting and you can extend the power peak close to the redline like John did on Annie's GS:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v443/jcp8832/AnniesGS500dynoRun-1.jpg)
You are correct of course GSJACK. For maximum acceleration you should up-shift at the point which will place the engine just a little before peak torque when the next higher gear is selected. On a close ratio gearbox this will likely be near the same revs each time but on a gearbox with "tall or short" intermediate ratios the shift revs will be quite different for each gear. Having an overdrive 6th gives relaxed, almost vibe free cruising with slightly improved economy. If it is hilly or I have a headwind I use 5th gear which is now roughly the equivalent of my stock 6th. As I have said on another similar thread recently I have been using 18/37 for 2 years and like it very much. With standard tyres this gives me 4950rpm at a "true" 100kph/62mph. I have recently recalibrated my speedo to eliminate the inbuilt 10% error. :cheers:
Macka
Well...i think if you do a little reading on the internet...you will see that upshifting to peak (engine) torque is not the best for acceleration....Upshift to peak HP....so you have to run your RPM past peak HP in order to shift to peak on the next higher gear.......
Some confuse engine torque with real wheel torque...rear wheel torque is AFTER you figure in the gearing.......max rear wheel torque (at a given ground speed) is going to come at peak engine HP.........
Remember HP is torque times RPM..........so torque is only part of the power equation........max HP is max HP...at max engine torque...you are producing significantly less than max HP... which means in order to get max acceleration you need to keep the engine as close as possible to max HP rpm........This is the whole reason for gears in the first place...in theory..if you had more gears...or "infinite gears"...you would just run the engine at best HP RPM and leave it there...and let the gearing go up continuously as the bike speed increases......
Cookie
Quote from: prmas on June 06, 2013, 04:51:17 PM
You are correct of course GSJACK. For maximum acceleration you should up-shift at the point which will place the engine just a little before peak torque when the next higher gear is selected. On a close ratio gearbox this will likely be near the same revs each time but on a gearbox with "tall or short" intermediate ratios the shift revs will be quite different for each gear. Having an overdrive 6th gives relaxed, almost vibe free cruising with slightly improved economy. If it is hilly or I have a headwind I use 5th gear which is now roughly the equivalent of my stock 6th. As I have said on another similar thread recently I have been using 18/37 for 2 years and like it very much. With standard tyres this gives me 4950rpm at a "true" 100kph/62mph. I have recently recalibrated my speedo to eliminate the inbuilt 10% error. :cheers:
Macka
http://www.sportrider.com/tech/146_0402_art/
Here's a nice article which explains it better than I ever can......
Note shift points are at the overlaps...sometimes at redline...sometime less than redline.....
Cookie
Sorry Twocool, as I read the article it pretty much confirms what I said but in a different way, therefore I disagree with you. There is no point upshifting so that your next gear places you at peak power as both torque and power are decreasing from that point on. As the article says, you have passed your best point. You will still have acceleration but less than you would have "in the torque/power band". If you get the "surge" on upshift as in the artlcle you have obviously shifted too late. It should feel like a pretty smooth curve but it will depend on gear ratio spacing and the characteristics of the engine. Sometimes on a standard gearbox that will lead to troughs in acceleration. That is why racing bikes use cassette gearboxes with the ability to change intermediate ratios quickly and easily to suite the track of the day. I agree that the engine is most efficient where the torque and power lines cross. It is interesting in the dyno sheets that GSJACK put up that after modification there was a very worthwile increase in power at the top end but quite a dip in torque between about 3500 and 5000 rpm. This shows that the engine has gained overall but has become more "peaky". It would feel a little flatter at city speeds in higher gears relative to the top end than when standard. If that is what you want , great. Not for me though.
Macka
Look at first and second gear in that article
you gotta go to redline (this is true for any gearing where the power curves don't touch each other...
Later gears which are closer spaced.... you shift where the power curve lines cross..so you don't go all the way to redline...
But engine horsepower is what you want......producing the most hp at the engine will always give you the best torque (drive force) at the wheel.
Again...if you had "infinite" gears...there would be only one smooth curve...it would approximate the six little curves you see on the charts.......if you made a smooth curve touching the little curves where each one crosses the next.........
If max HP comes at 8500 then that infinite transmission would keep the engine at 8500 the whole time..........
Since we have 6 finite gears...we have to approximate that curve with 6 little separate curves........
I grant you that in the higher and closer spaced gears...you don't want to run all the way to redline...because you would actually get more torque (driving force) to the wheel in the next higher gear........
The charts show that with some bikes..one gear curve actually crosses the next two gears....so you could actually go up two gears at once.
But remember what we are trying to do is get max torque at the rear wheel...not max engine torque.......
Max rear wheel torque come at peak engine HP.........
Quote from: prmas on June 06, 2013, 06:21:07 PM
Sorry Twocool, as I read the article it pretty much confirms what I said but in a different way, therefore I disagree with you. There is no point upshifting so that your next gear places you at peak power as both torque and power are decreasing from that point on. As the article says, you have passed your best point. You will still have acceleration but less than you would have "in the torque/power band". If you get the "surge" on upshift as in the artlcle you have obviously shifted too late. It should feel like a pretty smooth curve but it will depend on gear ratio spacing and the characteristics of the engine. Sometimes on a standard gearbox that will lead to troughs in acceleration. That is why racing bikes use cassette gearboxes with the ability to change intermediate ratios quickly and easily to suite the track of the day. I agree that the engine is most efficient where the torque and power lines cross. It is interesting in the dyno sheets that GSJACK put up that after modification there was a very worthwile increase in power at the top end but quite a dip in torque between about 3500 and 5000 rpm. This shows that the engine has gained overall but has become more "peaky". It would feel a little flatter at city speeds in higher gears relative to the top end than when standard. If that is what you want , great. Not for me though.
Macka
you can see on Jack's charts..that at peak torque...you're producing about 34 Hp at 7000 rpm
while the max HP comes in at 38 HP at 8500 but the curve is still pretty flat up to 9000..........
so after an up shift...if you're down to 7000...you are 4 HP short.........
the closer you keep the engine to 8500 the faster you will accelerate...
Cookie
i do find this interesting... :thumb: ... specially prmas 18/37 combo ...
as for the gearing vs torque vs hp bit ... cant help myself ...
(http://geek-news.mtv.com//wp-content/uploads/geek/2013/06/e3battle.jpg)
.... and this is my preferred seating ..
(http://static.ie.groupon-content.net/98/33/1354270413398.jpg)
Lol, Janx. I'm more confused how we got there! All I am trying to do is present data, in an objective way and then share my opinion based on those numbers and my experience. Especially considering by increasing the gearing I am effectively going the wrong way in the higher torque argument.
Either way. I added the Speed/RPM graph and corresponding gears information for the 16T sprocket. I will be recreating this graph for the 18T this weekend.
'how we got there' ... pffft .. easy ... classic case of "my engineers sliderule is bigger and shinier than your engineers sliderule!!" .. happens all the time...
.... nevertheless .. i AM going to re-sprocket my bike with a 17 or 18 up front... and either a 39 again or 37 on the back .. gotta get the funds together tho :icon_rolleyes:
thinking of getting all the bits .. and over time trying them out... so then i can 'grunt appropriately' yes/no in these kind of discussions..
probably going to get a clip link chain too!!! .. ooooeeeerrrrr gasp goes the crowd!! :icon_rolleyes: .. so i can pull the chain out easier and give it a proper clean when it needs it... cleaning a chain on the bike never seems to get right into the nooks and crannies!!
of course this will mean i need to actually learn to do spanner-ish type things on the bike .. but sacrifices must be made in the name of "cos i can"
really a torque/hp comparison "hoedown" is pointless in this thread... no offense meant... its about how you feel with your change in cogs .. every other person is going to have a different view anyway .. love it or hate it ..
looking forward to your reports/charts .. will give some more good baseline checking info for later!! :thumb:
Quote from: twocool on June 06, 2013, 08:01:09 PMyou can see on Jack's charts..that at peak torque...you're producing about 34 Hp at 7000 rpm
while the max HP comes in at 38 HP at 8500 but the curve is still pretty flat up to 9000..........
so after an up shift...if you're down to 7000...you are 4 HP short.........
the closer you keep the engine to 8500 the faster you will accelerate...
Cookie
Quote from: gsJack on June 06, 2013, 01:52:48 PMso max acceleration can be had shifting at 9-9.5k rpm. Doing so drops the rpm about 2k rpm to the top of the torque curve at approx. 7000 rpm. That's why I refer to running at 7-9k rpm for max performance on stock GS shifting up and down to keep it there.
That's why I say upshifting at 9-9.5k will give max acceleration on the stock GS since it is a full 2k rpm drop on the 2-3 shift but it's an increasingly lesser drop on the 3-4 and the 4-5 shifts. If you look at a 2k drop from 9.5k to 7.5k rpm on the dyno chart you will see near equal amounts of HP below max HP above and below the 8.5k max rpm point. And at the higher 3-4-5 gear shifts the best point will drop closer to the 9k. Here's a chart showing the speeds in mph of the GS at 7k and 9k rpm in all gears for your amusement, we've been here before in such a similar almost silly discussion:
(http://www.gs500.net/gallery/data/500/GS500gearing-sprocket-rpms.jpg)
And now I will take Janx's astute advice and withdraw from the field of battle with apologies to Soloratov for my part in the hijacking of his thread. :icon_lol:
Quote from: Janx101 on June 06, 2013, 09:36:32 PM
'how we got there' ... pffft .. easy ... classic case of "my engineers sliderule is bigger and shinier than your engineers sliderule!!" .. happens all the time.........................
........................really a torque/hp comparison "hoedown" is pointless in this thread... no offense meant... its about how you feel with your change in cogs .. every other person is going to have a different view anyway .. love it or hate it ..
Given the difficulty of finding an 18tooth front sprocket I would really look at a 17/36 combination if it was available.
http://vortex-sprockets.com/categories.php?category=Suzuki-Sprockets/GS500-89%252d08&sort=featured&page=1
http://gstwins.com/gsboard/index.php?topic=62854.msg738503#msg738503
I also added link to an 18T with hub
I have nothing to add to this thread.
36tooth rear sprocket in steel ? Bueller ?
My front shoulderless 18t sprocket (on my K9) is steel but the rear 37t is alloy and shows no wear after 11,500km. If it is kept clean and lubed it should give good service. I bought the alloy one as an experiment but it has exceeded expectations. :thumb:
Macka
Added Tank 2 stats for the day. So far, a marked increase in fuel mileage is obvious, but more so is the dramatic decrease in RPM that I can say has made a great difference in my riding comfort.
Increase?
Quote from: Soloratov on June 09, 2013, 12:43:07 PM
Added Tank 2 stats for the day. So far, a marked increase in fuel mileage is obvious, but more so is the dramatic increase in RPM that I can say has made a great difference in my riding comfort.
woops, typo.
GsJack .. Wasn't hacking at your stat sheets at all! .... They always show real things.... If anything .. The two lads ... Errrr .. Twocool and Prmas ... But still not hacking at them .... Just thought it was a trifle amusing that both of them said they agree with your stat sheets completely ... But then disagreed with each other on the interpretation .... I think? ...
The old saying .. 'Never argue Politics or Religion' ... Should nowadays include 'or over the Internet' :laugh:
Added 3rd tank results and final data averages.