SOHC.co.uk Forums > CB500/550

Cb550 k3 primary chain

<< < (6/9) > >>

Oddjob:

--- Quote from: Trigger on November 02, 2022, 10:42:07 PM ---23131-426-003 is not a discounted part, found in the UK straight away >> https://www.davidsilverspares.co.uk/parts/by-part-number/hpart_23131323000/   :o

23131-323-000  was not the wrong part number, that was the first number, then supersede to 23131-323-003  :o

The Honda primary chain is made by Tourmax and is a 63HV30350 and the Kawa chain can be made by who ever can make a chain the cheapest. We used to build GT550 engines back in the 90's and Kawazaki were using Hi-Vo chains from B.W.M at that time. Just because a chain looks the same, it has different Max tensile strength's and different Fatigue tensile strength's  ;)

--- End quote ---

Read what I said, I said try a web search for 23131-426-003 and see what they say when they haven't got stock. DS isn't going to say it's discontinued when he has stock because it would prove that his stock must be old and therefore bought at far lower prices than what he's no charging for them, he probably paid around £14 for each chain when they were available and now he can gouge a nice £126 out of you for something he paid virtually nothing for. CMS are the same. As soon as they have no stock (and DS only have 1 ) they'll be saying it's been discontinued by Honda along with all the other dealers who don't have one in stock. As per https://www.diyspareparts.com/parts/honda/chain-primdrive-23131-426-003/

Secondly, the Honda chain was actually made by Tsubaki originally, they may have switched suppliers later when they did the 650 which would make sense as the 650 engine was more powerful and thus may have needed a slightly stronger chain, the CB650Z was a 63HP motor and the 500 was around 48-50HP depending on who you trust, it may also explain why Honda changed the part number, Honda NEVER changed a part number if the original part was ok, it's why you see parts inside engines with 028 middle part number, meaning it was first fitted to a REALLY old Honda, if it was the same part but a different supplier they'd just change the end 3 numbers, hence 23131-323-000 going to 23131-323-003, just a small change, possibly a small revision or a different supplier. Changing the number entirely means it's not the same part, it will do however, it's like fitting a drive chain, you can fit a standard chain and it will be fine but you can also fit a heavy duty chain and that's good as well but will last longer.

As for Kawasaki fitting the cheapest and thus weaker chain, OMG really, Kawasaki are renowned for over engineering their engines, the part number was still being fitted to bikes from the late 90s, the GPZ600R was the last to use it and that engine was pushing out 85hp. You really think Kawasaki, renowned for their engineering prowess, would fit a sub standard chain, if it's good enough to fit in a 85hp motor it's certainly good enough to fit in a 50hp motor which the GT550 was. If it wasn't good enough you can bet your house on it that Kawasaki would have changed it when they made the GPZ600R, the fact they didn't proves it's not sub standard.

Thirdly, the 23131-323-000 comment, I knew that the part number had changed and been superceded to 23131-426-003, if I knew then you knew as you must order a few, so why say it's that number, I didn't bring the part number up first, you did. If I'd have listed that number I can guarantee you'd have commented on the fact it had changed, just to prove me wrong, which you have done not only for myself but for quite a few other members lately, don't think this has gone unnoticed Graham. I decided to be the bigger man and not comment as it didn't seem necessary, if you go to order that part number you'll get transferred to the 426 number anyway, unless you find some REALLY old stock somewhere.

I'd much prefer it if you would stop this constant sniping from the side lines, as I'm sure other members would, no need to correct me for a slight mistake like a part number revision, if I'm 100% wrong then yes, feel free to comment as I'd sooner you did that than chance me misleading members and it having severe consequences, either financially or engineering wise. Otherwise, sit on your hands and be the bigger man and say nothing, like I've done for some time now.

Oddjob:

--- Quote from: Sesman on November 03, 2022, 02:18:00 PM ---Didn’t realise deltarider was a Johnny Foreigner. He left the m out of km. so naturally I assumed he meant kilo…thousand (10 power 3). Pretty impressive all the same. I don’t think I could stand owning a bike that long.

--- End quote ---

I've owned 2 500s for many years now, the K reg was bought in 1973 with 8000 on it and currently has over 265000 miles on it and is still on the road doing more, although it's not exactly in perfect nick ATM as it's got the engine apart for a strange noise that we can't trace as yet.

The L reg was bought in 1978 with 34000 on it and that's the one I'm currently restoring for the second time and that's done around 163000 but that's had a lot of new parts fitted, strangely neither has been bored and neither has had a new clutch but they've both had numerous chain and bearings fitted in that time. They really are both a little like Triggers broom, not a lot left of the original bike. Sadly the L reg will have a new set of barrels fitted off a 550 this time, not seen the barrel liners yet but I'd imagine they'll have some damage after being stored for over 40 years.

Nurse Julie:
Oddjob and Trigger, please will you both BLOODY SHUT UP. Both sit on your hands, keep your fingers away from any keyboard until you can both type something that is of interest to other forum members.

Sesman:
I’ve just seen a squirrel…..🫣

Johnny4428:
Referee! 📣📣📣 (couldn’t find a whistle)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page