Sprocket mods Fz6 s2

[Z3R0_zhift]

I have been researching for quite some time and finding the best sprocket teeths for my bike. The stock OEM is 16t front 46t rear. I know for sure for track usage it will be - 1 front +2 rear would be the best but made up my mind to make it up for commuting and touring. I'm planning for a tour up north in Malaysia and Thailand next year.

Previously, I had up the rear by +1 and the fuel consumption was guzzling fast as compared to a friend's fuel consumption of 420km(using stock teeths) which mine was 320km with reserve. I like the torque of going through the streets and traffic but also looking for a better speed and fuel economy.

I was thinking of getting 17t front and 47t back. Have checked on the gearcommander website on the final drive ratio and sprocket graph but was concern that the pull on the throttle would be choppy plus struggling through steep slopes and the damage to the transmission of the gears or valves. I'm wondering whether anyone tried this setup before, or should I just stick to OEM stock as suggested by another friend.

 

[major tom]

I went with a 17t front, stock rear and my gas mileage is better with no appreciable loss of lower gears acceleration. A bonus is now my speedo is right on speed wise but the ODO is now off as it reads less then actual distance traveled by the same percent. Oh well, you cant have it all but a worth while trade off for me as I go every where five + over and no mental gymnastics are needed.

 

[Z3R0_zhift]

Thanks for sharing. I was thinking of the setup of 17t 46t and 17t 47t. Judging from the current 47t rear sprocket, it could last me another year.

Sent from my GT-N7105 using Tapatalk

 

[beatle]

Previously, I had up the rear by +1 and the fuel consumption was guzzling fast as compared to a friend's fuel consumption of 420km(using stock teeths) which mine was 320km with reserve. I like the torque of going through the streets and traffic but also looking for a better speed and fuel economy.

Fuel economy differences that huge would be due to something other than gearing. If you have additional torque and like to use it, you may find yourself twisting the throttle a little further. A gearing change won't have any affect on the engine or transmission. If anything, it would have an easier life with lower gearing. "Lugging" the engine in high gear and low speed is very hard on an engine.

 

[FinalImpact]

I added 2 to the driven sprocket (rear) and mpgs are nearly unchanged. This is not a torque engine and it likes to rev. So keep in mind that as you lower the ratio there is an impact on the engines perceived load and it can add fuel to compensate for decreased manifold vacuum which could hurt mpgs more than it helps.
Connect a vacuum gauge to the intake and run a before and after test at the same speeds (corrected speed). You will likely notice the engine vacuum decreased as the numerical drive ratio gets lower. i.e from 2.875:1 to 2.7:1. Stock vs 17/46...

I'd love to see some real world testing that shows various ratios and their impact on fuel economy.

With the exhaust, ignition, and fuel controller mods, I still get 50mpg and she's quick all while pulling more RPM to go the same distance!

 

[Z3R0_zhift]

Yeah, would love to see real world testing too on the different sprocket ratios on fuel economy. Currently send in my bike for valve clearance (new tensioner, valve chain & etc) and clutch plate (new friction plates as inform the rest are fine) change. Told the mech of the fuel issue and he told it was the sprocket prob. Normally I would rev up to 6-7k for a smoother change in the gearing. Does that contribute so much on the fuel loss? Other than gearing what do you think? Can it be my scorp exhaust as there's the normal backfiring which I believe the fuel is too rich?

The bike is ready for collection tonight, and prolly I'll test out a few days to see if there's any changes to the fuel.



Sent from my GT-N7105 using Tapatalk