My Thoughts, 
,
You may disregard the original writer's reasons about O rings, since he was speaking about Honda 750's, not the 550. Please read on, it will make sense.
I got to the point where I felt a new chain and sprockets were becoming a serious consideration. I contacted one of the well regarded members on this forum; well known for his savvy on the K series bikes. I will leave his name out; I do not want to put him on the spot to defend his views; however, you may consider this my view because I agree with him 100%.......... I am using his words because he said it so well. And, once again, he illustrates that things may not be as simple as they seem............ I didn't know about the angled, offset sprockets of Honda's design.........
This is Beginning of Quote: " I am a big fan of Honda's own sprockets for a couple of reasons:
1. Honda tapered the teeth because the sprockets do not run dead true in line. The taper makes
the chain track easier to the settling points in the teeth, improving power transfer, smoothness
and quietness.
2. The "base circle" of Honda's own sprockets are .5mm to .8mm larger than standard ANSI
sprockets. This was done to improve chain longevity and quietness, and it causes the sprockets
and chain to work together more smoothly and wear together as a mated pair.
I, too, dislike O-ring chains on these bikes. The main reason is this non-inline tracking that
Honda went with on this design. I don't know exactly why they did this, but it remained on the
whole "K" series. I'm not sure about the "F" series, I've never checked. O-ring chains raise
the quandry of lubricants: a lube that's good for the chain-to-sprocket contact is bad for the
O-rings, and vice-versa. I have had the absolute best luck with Diamond's non-O-ring chains
(try a Kawasaki shop, they often seem to have them) because they have an extra .005" clearance
between the edges of the rollers and the sideplates, and everything is hardened to a high
degree. They also have an extra .002" clearance inside the rollers so lube can work its way
in by wicking action when the sprockets kick the chain sideways (because of the misalignments),
which also forces water and grit out at the same time. This chain will cost $120, but it's
worth it.
The next best choice is Reynold's chains, IMO. These are available at Triumph shops, as they
are British chains. They are very hard and have extra sideplate clearances, like the Diamond,
for better sprocket entry and exit action, too, which is a common need on British bikes (also
misaligned). These can run $150.
Many of the late 1960s hi-power bike designs ran this "parallel sprockets" configuration
(instead of inline). It seems the thinking was that having the rear sprocket closer to the
centerline of the frame would reduce the leverage across the axle, especially when the engines
were getting wider and wider. In the case of the CB750K, the swingarm is so strong that I don't
think it mattered, but on a Norton Commando it made a real noticeable difference, because the
swingarm wasn't so stiff.
I've tried many, many different combinations: the aluminum sprockets are very short-lived and
don't have the tapered teeth edges, but are popular with racers because of the light weight.
O-rings work on 630 size chains because there are far fewer teeth and joints in a given system,
but they rob power with those dragging seals, and they still need lube, anyway, so I can't see
the advantage. I can get nearly
50,000 miles from a set of Honda sprockets with a Diamond XLR
series chain, while no other chain I ever used got more than 15,000 before it became snatchy
and uneven and noisy, which tears up sprockets quick. I use Kal-Gard moly chain lube (still
have half a case!), because it "sets up" and sticks real well to the chain, needing very little
lube to do the job. One (big) can lasts about 12,000 miles if the chain is washed and relubed
at the carwash at 1,000 mile intervals."
End of Quote After more than 60 years of buying, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that you get what you pay for; there are no free lunches.........
~ ~ ~ jaknight ~ ~ ~
