428 or 520?

[JerseyTBR7]

The 520 chain works just fine. I use a 100 link standard chain, 32 rear, 13 front sprockets.

It really only comes down to preference.

Read Megadan's review above, he summarized it quite nicely.

[Mudflap]

The Oring chains are indeed stiff but they do loosen up over time, at least a little bit. The X ring chains are much more flexible.

[RedCrowRides]

Note : O-Ring chains are fine for street use, but not so much for offroad ,the grit chews through the o-rings pretty darn fast .Use standard chain or X ring for offroad use .

[Megadan]

Originally Posted by Wild Dog

That's because they are fitted for the taste of the area they are being sold.

Here you are not going to find any CG clone that use a 520 chain and is not even a price thing.
Because when we are talking about chinese chains the average the same fro a 428 or a 520.
Japanese brand the difference is marginal at best.

With the 520 you have limited selection of sprockets (for our motorcycles), you may run into clearance issues.
In my experience, 520 were a hair wider than the 428, maybe because i was looking at non oring chains.

You won't find most CG bikes fitted with a 5xx series chain here either. There are the odd exceptions due to the importer either requesting it or the factory ran out of chain that day I would imagine, but even those tend to come with 530 chain.

As far as the width thing, it tends to vary a bit by manufacturer, as does the height, based on the quality of the steel they use, and thus the thickness of the material used in their link plates. So I won't even argue that point. As somebody else stated, lots of variables.

As far as sprocket selection. There is a little bit of limitation, although not as much as you would think. I can hit almost all of the same ratios with a 520 setup that you could hit with a 428, with the exception being on the extreme ends of the spectrum that almost nobody would run anyway. With a 520 chain you can run an 11, 12, or 13 front, and a rear ranging from 30 to 42 teeth with off the shelf and readily available sprockets. That gives you ratios of 3.82 to 2.31

Then, at the end of the day the 520 chain itself still ends up being a bit lighter when comparing a given length of the same style of chain from the same manufacturer.

Like I said, the smaller 428 chain does have its own advantages, and is more than adequate for these bikes in the uses that most people put them through. Cost wise, if you were to buy both sprockets and a chain the 520 is a little bit more expensive, but not by much (maybe 10-20 bucks). I think for high load/hard use the 520 is the better chain given the weight of the bike and rider more than the power of the engine.