Time to replace front and rear sprocket and chain. Technical assistance requested please!

[Puttin Along]

32,XXX on an 05 FZ6 and from the dirty abused shape of it all I’d guess that the sprocket/chain setup is still factory parts! Have noticed a pulsing/clunking when holding at a steady RPM on a smooth road. A friend said the rear sprocket is in bad shape. I decided to do a 15 tooth up front, stock size rear (Sunstar) and new 530 DID chain. Same friend is gonna help replace it all and I want to make sure I have all the proper information prior to getting started. I also read that the torque specs are off for the rear nuts and that the nuts are locking or something. How do I get them off? Do I need to put new on, or can I use old? What all torque specs do I need, front and rear etc? Thanks in advanced! Will post pics, I am sure it’s dirty, nasty and worn!

 

[motojoe122]

I think the agreed torque was 45 ft pounds for rear sprocket nuts. I didn't have an issue with mine when I did the 520 swap, reused the nuts.

 

[Puttin Along]

Nasty dirty! Bad PO! Good me for reading and learning to do this maintenance! I will keep my new set up clean.... any tips on that? Also still any input on removal and installation would be great as I don't have my parts yet!

 

[FinalImpact]

I think the agreed torque was 45 ft pounds for rear sprocket nuts. I didn't have an issue with mine when I did the 520 swap, reused the nuts.

I thought you took those to spec without issue? 72 ft/lbs??

 

[FinalImpact]

Drive sprocket cover bolt M6 3 10 Nm (1.0 m·kg, 7.2 ft·lb)
Rear wheel axle nut M24 1 120 Nm (12 m·kg, 87 ft·lb)
Drive sprocket nut M20 1 85 Nm (8.5 m·kg, 61 ft·lb)

Rear wheel sprocket and rear wheel drive hub M10 6 100 Nm (10 m·kg, 72 ft·lb)
** The controversy topic is 6 nuts retaining the sprocket. Some have damaged them at 70++ ft/lbs. See notes below**

Per your request in PM, here is the same info I sent. Maybe you didn't get it?

From the home screen there are some links to the left, follow them to "bone****" site and download the PDF of the Factory Service Manual it will have all the details you need.

Word of caution about the rear 6 nuts on the rear hub.
Oil them with engine oil BEFORE REMOVING THEM! Once removed, THOROUGHLY CLEAN with MAF or Brake cleaner the studs and nuts and washer. Confirm there is NO grease, no burrs, thread damage to the studs or nuts. If there is, replace them.

REAR WHEEL
16 90116-10485-00 BOLT,STUD, 6, $2.55
17 90185-10009-00 NUT, SELF-LOCKING, 6, $2.31
18 90201-10021-00 WASHER, PLATE, 6, 2.13

INSTALLATION:
DO NOT lubricate the threads, install dry and bring up to tq spec in three steps using a star pattern. Final Spec is 72 ft/lbs, but some people have had failure at the OEM tq spec. I personally would not go any less than 65 ft lbs.

Get a chain breaker and rivet tool and make certain you new chain is long enough before cutting the old one off. i.e. count the links.

Good luck!

Again - do not use locktite on the 6 nuts. Its up to you about using it on the front nut. A couple dabs would not hurt.

Things that go wrong for some:

• Verify sprocket and chain widths, PNs and all that as some have had mismatched components.
• Make certain rear brake mount is in the grove in the swing arm.
• Don't overtighten the new chain. With the transmission in neutral, pull tension on the chain (while on centerstand) leaving 2" of total deflection up and down. Tighten rear axle nut.

 

[motojoe122]

I thought you took those to spec without issue? 72 ft/lbs??

I did torque it to factory spec and had no issue. I had remembered from previous discussions that some members suggested 45 ft lb. For the rear sprocket nuts.

 

[2old2ride]

Don't forget the little washer that you fold over the front sprocket nut. You might be able to pound it flat and reuse it but for less then 10$ why?
There are several good write-ups w/ pics on doing this. IIRC, there is a hot link here someplace. Maybe in "How To"?
When I did mine last year, I ordered a new nut too. The old one was losing threads.

 

[2old2ride]

I did torque it to factory spec and had no issue. I had remembered from previous discussions that some members suggested 45 ft lb. For the rear sprocket nuts.

I broke one trying to get to 72. So I ordered a new set (blue, of course). Since they were aluminum they would not have the same torque rating. So I did them hand tight + half a turn. I checked them and that worked out to 40 or 45 Ft. Lbs. I check them once a week when I check my chain. So far it hasn't fallen apart. I'm running a 520 supersproc. That is an aluminum sprocket with steel teeth. It's an experiment so I keep an eye on it. My baby will be 10 soon. I'm thinking about a new Cush. While I can still get one from the factory.

 

[TownsendsFJR1300]

The S2 model (07 and up) uses a different front sprocket locking nut (up graded from the earlier bikes), you may consider one of those. The nut actually has a lip on the outer end that peens flat over the shaft. Some loctitie wouldn't hurt either.

Re the rear sprocket hub, clean the threads before removing the nuts and unbolt (regular threads).

Re the torque; Please read this thread and especially post # 29 where I posted other numerous failures at 72 ft lbs on other Yamaha's, R6's, R1, not counting the dozen or so here(over the years);

http://www.600riders.com/forum/garage-mechanical-help/53487-rear-sprocket-carrier-failed-studs.html

You may get to 72 ft lbs with clean dry threads, you may not (you can re-use the nut/washer-unless damaged). IMO, I'd stop at 45-50 but read the thread and links and decide..

Worse case scenerio, if they strip, you get to buy new stud(s) and nut(s), (they spin into the hub with some HD locktite) and get to do a "DO OVER". As Randy posted, the bolts, nuts aren't terribly expensive, just a PIA to stop, order them and wait...

Good luck and please post how it goes..

 

[FinalImpact]

In light of the thread being fouled with much opinion and few facts I'm entertained by the following:

Because these fasteners have failed it appears to be justification to randomly pick a derated torque value as the NEW "STANDARD" while offering ZERO supporting evidence as to how its OK!

Again - if this were an internal engine part like a connecting rod bolt, you would FIX THE PROBLEM AND NOT just derate the manufactures specification!! On the flip side, at least we don't have stores of flying sprockets sawing things apart due to stud failure!​

If we read about every success story would that be a value add? Lets add some perspective: From 2003 when this part was introduced I'm guessing that tens of thousands have been replaced! (NO FACTS :spank: ) But are there thousands ++++ of threads on FAIL?
People write about fail because it took a basic moment in time and wrecked it. That is not justification that the specification is wrong.

Just sayin...
/end rant

 

[PhotoAl]

Ditto on the rear sprocket nuts. 72 is way too much. Don't remember where I saw it but there was a thread that discussed it and the recommended torque is much less. The 72 ft lbs was discussed as a known typo. My CBR600RR says to torque to 47 ft lbs or 64 Nm which is much less. The rear axle is 72 ft lbs.

 

[iSteve]

I did mine at 45ft-lbs I never had a bike that had 72 as suggested in the Haynes manual. I have a friend with a GSXR and his Haynes manual had the same 100nm spec. He asked the Suzuki dealer and they said the proper spec was 44 Ft-lbs.

 

[TownsendsFJR1300]

In light of the thread being fouled with much opinion and few facts I'm entertained by the following:

Because these fasteners have failed it appears to be justification to randomly pick a derated torque value as the NEW "STANDARD" while offering ZERO supporting evidence as to how its OK!

Again - if this were an internal engine part like a connecting rod bolt, you would FIX THE PROBLEM AND NOT just derate the manufactures specification!! On the flip side, at least we don't have stores of flying sprockets sawing things apart due to stud failure!​

If we read about every success story would that be a value add? Lets add some perspective: From 2003 when this part was introduced I'm guessing that tens of thousands have been replaced! (NO FACTS :spank: ) But are there thousands ++++ of threads on FAIL?
People write about fail because it took a basic moment in time and wrecked it. That is not justification that the specification is wrong.

Just sayin...
/end rant

On post #9, on this thread, I posted a link, once there, (post #29). Once clicked upon, pertaining to the failures. SIX (6) different threads with numerous failures, fixes, etc (didn't take long to find BTW).

Please take the time and effort to read them as you keep saying there is "NO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE".
It is literally there in black and white.

Also, as you pointed out, if a torque wrench is off by say up to 30%, add that to the indicated 72 ft lbs, guess what, failure big time-gaurenteed. If its reading low, you'll probably get away with it.

We are talking about studs that simply hold a sprocket on. NOT a critical connecting rod bolt. It is NOT holding a piston while rotating up and down with extreme forces on it...

As YOU posted in the above mentioned thread (that I referred to), even (in your chart), with the hardest bolt, the max torque is 62 ft lbs.

I'm very entertained as well, how in your post, your own chart, in your own words, stating that 72 lbs is good with the ONLY evidence being the FSM (which we all know has misprints).

Bottom line, should we believe the FSM or the chart, showing the hardest bolt, again the FSM being 10 lbs above it..


Want examples?

What is the torque value of the lug nuts on your auto/truck? And yes, its a different application, however, simple common sense, a car lug nut, with twice as many threads (its obviously taller) as the nuts in question (are easily half as tall), more surface area, generally only takes slightly more torque (in most cases). How can that be? Do all the auto manufacturers use cheap bolts to secure their wheels?

Using the above thought process, those lug nuts should be around 130 ft lbs (I'm guesstamating)



BTW, contrary to your believe and pictures, 72 ft lbs is NOT keeping that sprocket from spinning on the hub, the studs are. Take the nuts off altoghter. NOW, spin the sprocket on the hub, does it spin? No, it does not..
You've ignored this point before so I'll bring it up AGAIN...(to be ignored once again I'm sure)

Sleeved studs are there yet so there's no flattening of threads should the sprocket move the hub. Least we NOT forget, the hub does indeed have rubber cushions to soften the proverbial clunk when shifting into first etc.

Please rememember, most folks here DO NOT have a $300 Snap on torque wrench, that is accurate to 3% or under. They have something that works, of course won't be as accurate as the Snap On, and if it reads high, will probably have an issue. As noted earlier, if their torque wrench reads low, they'll likely get 72.

I would like to know the reasoning for posting and believeing a chart that says 62 lbs max should NOT be believed over the FSM of 72?. Each of those 6 nuts are almost as tight as the axle!! Why??

Needless to say, choose to ignore failures, but there are right there, in black and white, should you choose to at least read them...

For anyone and everyone reading, just do your own research and YOU decide...

Safe riding..

(And Randy, NOTHING PERSONAL, just different point of view)

 

[Puttin Along]

Thanks for all the quality input and advice! I rode to my buddy's house tonight and the job it done! He guided me through and I did most of the work! Easy really! I didn't know how to adjust the chain. It was good to have a very experianced person there! He has a Snap On tourque wrench, went with 45lbs on the rear studs. Rear was pretty worn looking to me, check it out. Turns out the rear sprocket that was on the bike was a 48 and 16 up front! So I guess I won't notice much sine I went 15 up front and 46 rear. This explains why I get passed when cruising on the highway. Speed limit = 65 I'll cruse around 70ish = cagers passing all over = WTF. Guess I was about 11% off the whole time! Thanks again to all!

 

[Cali rider]

And, as another supporting element just look at some of these 1,340,000 results: https://www.google.com/search?q=yamaha+sprocket+misprint

 

[TownsendsFJR1300]

Thanks for all the quality input and advice! I rode to my buddy's house tonight and the job it done! He guided me through and I did most of the work! Easy really! I didn't know how to adjust the chain. It was good to have a very experianced person there! He has a Snap On tourque wrench, went with 45lbs on the rear studs. Rear was pretty worn looking to me, check it out. Turns out the rear sprocket that was on the bike was a 48 and 16 up front! So I guess I won't notice much sine I went 15 up front and 46 rear. This explains why I get passed when cruising on the highway. Speed limit = 65 I'll cruse around 70ish = cagers passing all over = WTF. Guess I was about 11% off the whole time! Thanks again to all!

Yea, I'd say you got your moneys worth out of them, several times over!!! Your axctually lucky you didn't throw a chain. Congrates!!

 

[TownsendsFJR1300]

And, as another supporting element just look at some of these 1,340,000 results: https://www.google.com/search?q=yamaha+sprocket+misprint

Holy cow!!!

 

[Puttin Along]

Yea, I'd say you got your moneys worth out of them, several times over!!! Your axctually lucky you didn't throw a chain. Congrates!!

Really? That far gone huh? Well on the short slow ride home, as it was dark and wet, the feel was great! Much smoother and more responsive and other weird feelings in the bike seemed to go away! Money well spent and got to learn a lot too! Like saw a cush drive = never knew that was there!

 

[FinalImpact]

Like any MISPRINT - if the manufacture made such a grave error there would likely be a REAL DOCUMENT CORRECTING THE OVERSIGHT! Again I'm not saying its right or WRONG - I'm saying BRING PROOF how DROPPING it 40% is OK!!!

I was going to start a new thread for the purpose of this discussion, but here we go again!! Anyone who's worked in a manufacturing environment knows you don't just change sh$t because you don't like the results. GET SOME FACTS! Just because people failed, that is NOT JUSTIFICATION for a change of 40%!!!!

In short - I'm battling the Principal of the matter more than the condition. That is - Willy nilly picking a ## out of thin air doesn't fly for me!! Yes, 1340K is a lotta hits! But what does a Hit mean?? Anything? As I mentioned; from 2003 - 2012, I bet thats allot of bikes with the sprockets off! So Bring some JUSTIFICATION on how this new value of 45 ft / lbs is the correct value!!! That's What I'm asking!

Please bring facts regarding where a stud is used in the same application (NOT SIZE),and is compromised! Do bear in mind that Wheel studs on the cage are taking Axial and Radial loads and its not the same application. Not to mention the the general population must be capable of securing a wheel to the cage. Do you want those same folk workin on your bike??? Are the folk capable of changing your tires capable of changing your rear sprocket?

DO YOU THINK FOR A SECOND, that MAYBE, just MAYBE, they oversized that wheel stud on the cage for a reason so ANY Genius with an IQ capable of obtaining a license could replace a wheel and NOT FAIL??? Ya, there must be some margin of error with reference to a Tire Iron in the dark on a slippery slope with an 80lb girl and a 250lb man tightening nuts!!! But I'm guessing that doesn't apply here!

Regardless, The information has been taken and used in error again:

Scott,
There seems to be confusion with the intent of the "+/-30% error". My statement was not to say the measuring device had a 30% error. Its saying the average fastener tension has a error percentage of 30% when a tq is used to set tension on the fastener.
For a fastener to work it has to stretch (that stud has to stretch), thus the question is "how much does it stretch?" Just like you said its not practical and we don't know as the method to determine is too complicated.

But the only way to know fastener tension is to determine force applied or fastener stretch. That's why I said, fastener stretch has 5% error while a torque wrench method (not actual tq applied) has a 30% error. Meaning rotation friction (break away friction) can cause the clamp load error of up to 30%. Just like different platings, lube, dry, and contaminants can alter what the tq wrench acts on....

ALSO - you must keep in mind that some manufactures will (our company does) spec different components with greater yield strength than the "normal standard". It is common practice and the main reason why off the shelf parts can not be substitute as they DO NOT meet the manufactures standard. Like I said early, they have they're own recipe but we don't know what it is and are just guessing with no facts...

EVEN MORE DETAIL: http://www.fastenal.com/content/documents/FastenalTechnicalReferenceGuide.pdf

More fasteners: Proof Loads for Fasteners | Fuller Metric Parts Ltd.
Has both 1.25 and 1.5 proof strength, as well as the nuts. As stated it means little though as we don't know what yamaha used.

DRAMA - it keeps us coming back for more!

 

[Carlos840]

Thanks for all the quality input and advice! I rode to my buddy's house tonight and the job it done! He guided me through and I did most of the work! Easy really! I didn't know how to adjust the chain. It was good to have a very experianced person there! He has a Snap On tourque wrench, went with 45lbs on the rear studs. Rear was pretty worn looking to me, check it out. Turns out the rear sprocket that was on the bike was a 48 and 16 up front! So I guess I won't notice much sine I went 15 up front and 46 rear. This explains why I get passed when cruising on the highway. Speed limit = 65 I'll cruse around 70ish = cagers passing all over = WTF. Guess I was about 11% off the whole time! Thanks again to all!

If you want to correct your speedo have a look at the speedo healer, it is worth adding to your bike if you use a non stock gearing.
Super easy instal and it does what it says it does.

If you want to analyze your old and current gearing have a look at "gearing commander" it will let you compare any gearing to stock, pretty cool.

From memory, your 15/46 should give you a couple rpm more in each gear compared to 16/48 and lower the power band a bit more.

If you really want to have some fun go 15/48, that is just magical...