sprocket sizes

bigwol · Post by **bigwol** » Wed Aug 24, 2011 7:00 pm

Those who know the Honda will also know that it has a reputation for revving but I have no problem with it. Maybe I'm not as old as I feel.
[/quote]

Go Janet!

itma · Post by **itma** » Wed Aug 24, 2011 8:14 pm

Beesy that would sound about right for a 250 to me, [see my post earlier] I have to push my 350 along at 50 ish to keep up with the flow and thats just about where it starts to get too fussy for comfort.
Your answer is probably a bigger bike.
You are expecting too much from a 50year old bike.

Merlin · Post by **Merlin** » Wed Aug 24, 2011 9:04 pm

I agree itma my G3LS feels really calm at 45-50 any faster gets uncomfortable.
Merlin

beesy · Post by **beesy** » Wed Aug 24, 2011 9:48 pm

this is a 350, not 250. it's not a major problem for me, i just thought i'd ask the question, after all i'll be lucky to do more than 1000 miles per year.

itma · Post by **itma** » Wed Aug 24, 2011 9:52 pm

A 350 will pull one tooth higher on the gearbox; I have done that on my 350 heavyweight.
you lose a little bit of tractability in bottom but need much more gear changing on hills, evem moderate ones and especially with a pillion passenger.

bigwol · Post by **bigwol** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 1:00 am

One of the pleasures in riding these old bikes is being able to enjoy the scenery and not just see it go by in a blur!

Janet · Post by **Janet** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 5:55 am

Serious answer time now.

Keep looking for a standard rear sprocket so it goes back to the way it was designed and (if I've got my thinking correct about gearing ) it should go a teeny bit faster for the same engine speed. The advantages of this over other changes of sprockets are that you can ride it until you find one, it is an easy change when you do and, if it doesn't improve matters, it's unlikely to cause other performance deficiencies.

My G2CSR, being only a 250, seems to happily go much faster than 40mph except when I've got something else set up badly, such as the ignition. If your bike really isn't happy, I'd suspect some other problem. Alternatively, it may be that your bike is fine and you're just not used to engines like this, expecting it to blow up at any minute.

Silly answer time now.
quote: i'll be lucky to do more than 1000 miles per year. Nay lad, it's not that slow.

rex.webb · Post by **rex.webb** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:00 am

JANET ...............JANET !!!
Are you awake now your last posting
at 04.55 AM ?
Get to bed early tonight and get your rest up ready for the Week End FUN!.
After riding the "LE" any bike seems Noisey as you can hear the engine.
RIDE with CARE and LIVE LONG to ENJOY your BIKES.

Rob Harknett · Post by **Rob Harknett** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 11:02 am

Maybe every ones missing the point about the lightweights & how they rev at 50/60.
I do not recall seeing weight of rider mentioned in this thread. The bike was geared with many things considered.
Weight on the bike. I guess all those that feel the bike is low geared all ride solo Terrian has been mentioned, you would soon get fed up going down to 2nd to plod up step hills on a higher geared lightweight. I have 3 lightweigts, just for fun with ace bars etc on the 2 CSR's, great fun solo with less than 10 stone. 2 up not so good, drop down to 3rd or even 2nd on steep hills, then just sit and let it plod up, at a snails pace. On one Jampot run the wind was so strong, I was doing about 20 in 2nd, on the flat 2 up. The bike had standard gearing. If you think you lightweight is low geared, add a pillion passenger, take it out in the hills on a wet & windy day. Did it over rev. at 50/60, You would never know, you would never reach 60. The bikes were not designed just for a short solo run on a nice sunny day. They were designed to do a job, on the cheap.
A young mans fancy aged 16 in far off days even at 60mph, the wind whistling through his hair. Joys no longer to be had aged 60+ at 60mph and no hair for the wind to whistle through. Or did AMC get it right, thinking, those young men will eventualy find our twins too heavy for them and down size to lightweights. So lets give them something to complain about in a forum when its too wet and windy for them to ride.

itma · Post by **itma** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 3:06 pm

Rob has a pertinent point about weight, these bikes were aimed at much younger riders and none of us were exactly overweight in those days.
Just look at any 1950's 60's bunch of riders and see what a lean and scraggy lot we all were.

However, as I have said so often before, the art of old bikes is to learn to ride them SLOWLY
If you want to belt past everything on he roads, but a Honda or whatever.