Split link

Nick_imp

First service completed
Thread starter
Just a thought,as honda supply a split link for the drive chain in the parts book. Would you be happy to fit one to your chain or would you rivet only. I normally get my chains endless and use this time to remove the swing arm for greasing. But can't see a lot wrong fitting a split link. What's your thoughts.
nick.
 
Once you get above 75 hp I think rivet links are safer, but as a non-aggressive rider I'd have no issue running a master clip link on mine. I run one on my NC 750 even though it came with an endless originally from Honda..
 
I use a chain tool by Motion Pro to break a chain and rivet.




There are cheaper ones, but this one works well enough.
 
pdedse_imp said:
I use a chain tool by Motion Pro to break a chain and rivet.




There are cheaper ones, but this one works well enough.
Thank you for posting this video and sharing what you use. I need to buy a kit and was wondering how well Motion Pro compared with other manufacturers.
 
m in sc_imp said:
lol. i've run 130 HP+ bikes with split links. its not 1975 anymore. if you are worried about it, safety wire the link clip.
Wired clip on my 1977 cb550;

 
m in sc_imp said:
lol. i've run 130 HP+ bikes with split links. its not 1975 anymore. if you are worried about it, safety wire the link clip.


Heck...as someone that spent decades dumping clutches and having no mechanical sympathy in my younger years... I've never had (or seen) anyone have a chain come apart at the master link.

I'd have to see it to even believe it was a real thing and not just passed down non-sense from 'I knew a guy' talk....
 
Used to happen quite frequently in the late 70's. The chain would snap at the master link, the chain would run up and punch a hole in the cases in front of the counter sprocket. Stopped happening once they went to endless chains. Can't believe that you guys that mess with old bikes haven't come across welded up cases from thrown chains.
 
Back in the '70s and '80s when we were racing two-stroke dragons, we never had a riveted chain, always a C-clip for quick disconnect.
Some guys secured the clip with wire, like m in sc.
The most important thing is that it is oriented correctly = closed end in the direction of rotation.
For both of my CBs, I always use rivet type.
 
m in sc_imp said:
yeah, it's an old wives tale. maybe 50 years ago when the chain strength was nowhere near what it is today..
Seem like you assume things and thangs are getting stronger over the last 50 years, my impression is the opposite. But max's solution has always worked for me ;)
peterbaron_imp said:
Back in the '70s and '80s when we were racing two-stroke dragons, we never had a riveted chain, always a C-clip for quick disconnect.
Some guys secured the clip with wire, like m in sc.
The most important thing is that it is oriented correctly = closed end in the direction of rotation.
For both of my CBs, I always use rivet type.
BUT max's picture appears showing a link installed in the opposite direction, doesn't it ?
 
The Gecko_imp said:
m in sc_imp said:
yeah, it's an old wives tale. maybe 50 years ago when the chain strength was nowhere near what it is today..
Seem like you assume things and thangs are getting stronger over the last 50 years, my impression is the opposite. But max's solution has always worked for me ;)
peterbaron_imp said:
Back in the '70s and '80s when we were racing two-stroke dragons, we never had a riveted chain, always a C-clip for quick disconnect.
Some guys secured the clip with wire, like m in sc.
The most important thing is that it is oriented correctly = closed end in the direction of rotation.
For both of my CBs, I always use rivet type.
BUT max's picture appears showing a link installed in the opposite direction, doesn't it ?
BUT max's picture appears showing a link installed in the opposite direction, doesn't it ?
I thought that too, but it then occurred to me that it’s hard to see from the photo which side of the bike the chain is on.


Now, going back a step, The Ferret says chains in the 1970s used to snap at the master link and punch holes in things. Is that the same as a master link failure — in other words a c-clip coming off and the chain coming apart? One points to possible poor installation; ther other to material failure.
 
[/QUOTE]
BUT max's picture appears showing a link installed in the opposite direction, doesn't it ?
[/QUOTE]

Look closer at that photo/post. All the clues are there the clip is in the correct orientation. Bike is stated being a CB550, left side drive, like the CB1100. Photo clearly shows the link on incoming (lower side of travel) direction of the rear sprocket. Closed end of the clip correct.

As it is, chain technology, like a host of other technology pertaining our bikes, is just better. I'm just as guilty of romanticising the past, as many others. Heck, that's why we are all here. Riding an old looking bike, but one that's new...and better overall, than the bikes it is meant to emulate.

Oh man, my winter blues have definitely set in...
 
Regardless, if it's a poor installation issue, or a strength issue, there is a reason manufactures have gotten away from clip style masterlinks on motorcycles of medium displacement and larger. It's certainly not for convenience, it's for strength and safety...otherwise, why do it?

edit: That's not to say that someone couldn't run a clip style masterlink for the life of a chain and never have an issue (I am proof of that myself having run a clip style masterlink on my 21 NC 750 until the chain was worn out)
 
Another fruitful set of interesting good ideas, can i add one more assumption based only on my perception?

( Thanks SM and PB for the rotation direction tip )

There may be another reason for not fitting a removable " c " clip ( thanks Peter ) ;

Can a manufacturer be held responsible for fitting a product that could fail if the clip is re-assembled in the wrong orientation or not fitted in the closed " home " position ?

Try getting a rivet link backwards ( i know, it can be installed wrong too in many different ways but that can be proven after the event unlike a " missing link" )

Forum think tanks are such good places to work on these subjects no?
 
The ferret_imp said:
Regardless, if it's a poor installation issue, or a strength issue, there is a reason manufactures have gotten away from clip style masterlinks on motorcycles of medium displacement and larger. It's certainly not for convenience, it's for strength and safety...otherwise, why do it?

edit: That's not to say that someone couldn't run a clip style masterlink for the life of a chain and never have an issue (I am proof of that myself having run a clip style masterlink on my 21 NC 750 until the chain was worn out)

Actually it IS more convenient for them...and cheaper.

One chain...as opposed to more than 1 part #, separate inventory / packaging / SKU..

....and one less thing to assemble.

Cost cutting bean counting is assuredly the reason.
 
According to google

"Motorcycles primarily use staked chains instead of clip master link chains because a staked chain is considered significantly more secure and reliable, as the "staked" connection prevents any play or movement between the chain plates, while a clip master link can potentially come loose or fail under heavy stress, especially when dealing with the high torque and vibrations of a motorcycle engine; essentially, a staked chain offers greater strength and longevity compared to a clip link"

Like I said, an individual can use whichever style they choose, but staked chains are generally considered stronger and safer than clip style chains whether it saves the manufacturer money or not is irrelevant. For liability purposes many dealerships will not install a clip master link, just as they will not plug a tire.
 
Yea… google just rehashes junk it reads on various sites.

Pointless- as anyone with a brain can read that google said vibrations from the engine affect the chain…. and get a good chuckle.
66f3bfaa923200553c352fd8d93231ff.png



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top