Up-gearing from Stock 34 (rear) to 32 - NICE !!!

Hi Byookanum,
I just clicked onto your bike photo. Very pretty but where's the front brake?
WTF man, it ain't 1927 anymore!
Nobody these days will expect that it'll take you a half-mile to stop.
You are gonna end up as a smear of forensic evidence.
 
Hi Byookanum,
I don't like 18T front sprockets because using one lets the chain gnaw little notches in the shifter shaft and that bothers me.
And hey, a 17/30 will get you nearly the same ratio (1.765/1 vs 1.722/1) as an 18/31
and if you can find a 29T rear, 17/29 will get you 1.706/1.
Whatever, so long as you can be gentle on the clutch while pulling away and realize that what you now have is a 4-speed tranny with overdrive, you'll be fine.
FWIW, my Heritage came stock with 17/36 which, along with the 17/38 I'm currently using, is perfect for sidecar use but NFG on the highway.



You would need 17/28 or 17/29 to be the same as 18/31. 1 up or down in the front is like adding or subtracting 2-3 teeth in the rear.

I also run a 16 rear tire which I believe is a bit shorter than its counterpart 18 rear. Shorter tire also makes the gearing lower.

I love how there are so many people on this forum that ride nearly stock XS's and just cant get over the fact that some of just just dont give a fuck and will chop a XS up and do something waaaaaay different than how the bike came stock. Stock Sucks!
 
Hi Byookanum,
I just clicked onto your bike photo. Very pretty but where's the front brake?
WTF man, it ain't 1927 anymore!
Nobody these days will expect that it'll take you a half-mile to stop.
You are gonna end up as a smear of forensic evidence.


Fuck a front brake. They look like shit...

Have you ever ridden a rear brake only bike? No, then you have no idea what you are talking about.

Thanks
 
What never gets discussed in these arguments is the weight of the bike and rider, kinda makes the information quoted as mute.

A hard-tailed and striped bike with no front brake/rotor/caliper/guard/air-boxes/rear springs/swing-arm/rear frame/battery-box/original seat/indicators etc etc, weighs much less than an original unmolested XS so your gearing cannot be compared to them.

17/32 on a stock XS is totally different to your combination.

Read XSjohns article on his stock bike with 18/30 gearing with a low compression engine, also done modes to help breathing and jetted for the extra air. He was slight of build on a full weighted 80SG.

Nice bike, just hope you can stop in time before the texting lady in front of you sees you.
 
Fuck a front brake. They look like shit...

Have you ever ridden a rear brake only bike? No, then you have no idea what you are talking about.

Thanks

Invariably these issues will come up. If it isn't illegal then more power to you. The fact is stopping times and distances are greatly increased when no front brake is used. here is a graph that illustrates the differences between front/rear brakes, front and rear only.

I know what i prefer and i see a rear only bike roar past me at illegal speeds i shudder to think of the consequences, and even if the blame can be laid at the cage for braking a road rule, the bike that has rear only brake will be contributing to the crash as a major contributor because he could have avoided the crash if the bike was running front/rear brakes.

This is called defensive driving. Much rather be alive and wrong than dead and right.
 

Attachments

  • Bike F-R brake stopping distances.jpg
    Bike F-R brake stopping distances.jpg
    36.6 KB · Views: 169
Last edited:
Invariably these issues will come up. If it isn't illegal then more power to you. The fact is stopping times and distances are greatly increased when no front brake is used. here is a graph that illustrates the differences between front/rear brakes, front and rear only.

I know what i prefer and i see a rear only bike roar past me at illegal speeds i shudder to think of the consequences, and even if the blame can be laid at the cage for braking a road rule, the bike that has rear only brake will be contributing to the crash as a major contributor because he could have avoided the crash if the bike was running front/rear brakes.

This is called defensive driving. Much rather be alive and wrong than dead and right.


Where did your little bar graph/pic come from and is that based on disk brakes front and rear, drum front and rear or disk only rear or drum only rear. What was the weight of the bike?

I've put plenty of miles on my bike and have not had an issue with stopping yet nor am I worried about it.

It's funny how this tread went from discussing gearing to attacking the guy because he has no front brake. Running no front brake on an old school style short chop is nothing new and is still common practice today. Man up over there and pull your skirts up...
 
I once heard someone say: A man who does not know the value of a helmet, does not know the value of his head! Likewise, the same may apply to brakes! But, to each his own. Me, I see the front brake as being roughly 60+% of braking power, so I LIKE it! And, if you read my first post, my test drive on this gear change included yet another 'close call' with some young girl 'texting' instead of looking where she was going. That one didn't really call for as much 'brakes' as it did for maneuverability. But, a week ago, when an old man in a pickup truck decided to make a left turn right in front of me cuz he too was looking at his damn cell phone.... THAT was where a 'no front brake' bike would have meant a call for an ambulance......and hopefully me not being DOA. This is like the blinker thing too....... Hand Signals? Come on......when was the last time they taught those in Driver's ED? So, when you get slammed.....who do you blame? I say: Take Responsibility....drive like you're 'in'visible....but do what you can to make yourself overtly visible! And, make sure EVERYTHING is mechanically correct.....including having the best brakes possible. But, again....to each his own. Someone has to be the next fatality out there......just better someone else than me..... FWIW WC
 
Is this thread about front brakes or gearing?? Get over it people and deal with it.
 
I tried a 32 on my 74. It was tolerable. I dont see how guys run less. The bike loses major fun factor in stock trim even with a 32, so i cant fathom less. Think when i have to do them again ill do a 33. Wish mikes had the od 5th when i was doing my build...33t with an od would probably be awsome.
 
Going to a 32 rear, and this thread is making me hopeful.

ran a hard tail with only a mechanical drum. It was very controllable in a slide, much like a old BMX bike, and that saved me from eating a buick rear bumper once. I even rode that bike in the rain, stopping then was much worse. I went to a dual disc front and I'm happy.
 
Just to keep this thread 'on point'..... the factors involved in this gearing change are highly dependent on the following: #1, as always, rider/owner preference. Beyond that, #2 would be 'type' of riding', or intended 'gain' from the gear change {could be that going down vs up may be the correct choice}, 3) Engine status (stock vs modified) and even status of 'fresh' vs 'worn or tired', Rider/bike weight, 4) MPG vs Acceleration, 5) Loading...... 1 rider vs frequent 2-up, and 6) which has not been mentioned yet, but came up in a discussion on the subject: Type and size of rear wheel. With all the changes made to these bikes, a good many get different size wheels and tires. That alone can result in a 'final drive' ratio change vs the intended 'stock' performance levels. But, this is all good info. And, if I forgot something, please add it in. I'm owning up to the 'I like it this way' aspect of this being the Number One consideration....... But I think we all should acknowledge that the Yamaha Engineers weren't all that dumb, and set the bike up the way they did for a reason. Of course, things change.....and making those changes is what this thread is all about. But, we also have to consider the affects of those changes....both 'pro' and 'con'.....and remember that they all probably have some of both. If it was only 'good'....we'd have probably all done it by now.....or when you found your bike....it would'ave come that way!

TSD
 
Just to keep this thread 'on point'..... the factors involved in this gearing change are highly dependent on the following: #1, as always, rider/owner preference. Beyond that, #2 would be 'type' of riding', or intended 'gain' from the gear change {could be that going down vs up may be the correct choice}, 3) Engine status (stock vs modified) and even status of 'fresh' vs 'worn or tired', Rider/bike weight, 4) MPG vs Acceleration, 5) Loading...... 1 rider vs frequent 2-up, and 6) which has not been mentioned yet, but came up in a discussion on the subject: Type and size of rear wheel. With all the changes made to these bikes, a good many get different size wheels and tires. That alone can result in a 'final drive' ratio change vs the intended 'stock' performance levels. But, this is all good info. And, if I forgot something, please add it in. I'm owning up to the 'I like it this way' aspect of this being the Number One consideration....... But I think we all should acknowledge that the Yamaha Engineers weren't all that dumb, and set the bike up the way they did for a reason. Of course, things change.....and making those changes is what this thread is all about. But, we also have to consider the affects of those changes....both 'pro' and 'con'.....and remember that they all probably have some of both. If it was only 'good'....we'd have probably all done it by now.....or when you found your bike....it would'ave come that way!

TSD


And boats... Don't forget about boats...
 
18/30 with a 26" tall rear tire. A little slower on the getup, but perfect for relaxing cruises through the mountains and the highway miles to get there.
 
got one of the bikes out for a test run...low mileage stock 650 but so busy doing other things to it hadn't noticed po had put a 38 sprocket on the rear GOOD acceleration but 6500 revs= 110 kms,,, fairly useless accept for around town with 60 km limit but was trying to dial carbs in so was good for that...short runs...only trouble now is blown head gasket,pouring out...hopefully will come good with a retorque..debaiting which a 30 or a 34 of which have both but leaning to the 30 has mainly hway use
 
Last edited:
Fuck a front brake. They look like shit...
Have you ever ridden a rear brake only bike? No, then you have no idea what you are talking about.
Thanks

Hi Byookanum,
so will you look like shit when the EMTs drag you out from under whatever hit you when you couldn't stop.
And yes I have. 1924 Triumph single. Scared myself shitless. Mind you, the 6" rear brake didn't work too well neither.
 
Back
Top