I've mentioned this kind of question before...

What's the cheapest, best bang for the buck way of experimenting with the chain conversion? Should I buy new or used parts? I gather that sprockets and chains tend to do best when replaced together.. right? That suggests new parts. However, if I change sprockets, that negates that effect.

Does anyone have something to sell me?

I noticed that 17/43 is popular, but I live in the mountains and already have the 140/90 tire, Has anyone tried a 17/47? After having driven my car a lot again, I feel like I'm revving the tar out of the bike at 60 indicated. I ride several miles of highway (not Interstate) during my regular commute. 60-70 mph is my typical highway speed.

I think I'm going to need a stronger clutch for harder takeoffs.  Do you think I can stuff another couple of discs in there? (The "Yoda" Hi-Po clutch that people here have talked about). I only have about 18k on the bike? I remember that Oldfeller was collecting clutch discs.

Oh, yeah... as a reminder... my belt must be replaced with something fairly soon, as it is torn half in two.

You might want to look at 17/45 as a combo for highway/mts.

Kris,you picking up bad habits?

Kris01 wrote on 07/05/16 at 17:48:42:


LOL!

Good Point. I am considering clutch work as it is. I'd like to keep a little get up and go. I think I'll probably gravitate towards 17/47 for everyday use. I already have the 140/90 rear tire. That combo should be very close to 17/45 with stock 140/80 tire.

A clutch "upgrade" usually ends up grenading itself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmzGblbeDuU

Life is compromise...
I've come to believe, a 140/90 with stock final drive is maximum for versatile mountain riding...
When I went to a Kawa front pulley, I felt like I only had one gear option for any turn... ...rather than a choice of two gears for any point in any turn...

Every other bike I've ever owned, worked well with a gearing bump,.. but this one seems to me to be happiest where it is...

Better riders than me, may have different results...
... Dave and Versy both have... and others...
... but, I am a pretty good rider...

The question is,.. will higher gearing give you more than it takes away?..
...and are you good enough to compensate for that loss?...
...or,.. are you willing to accept slower performance in order to have a lower rpm as you cruise the most boring part of any ride?...

Highway, for me is no more than a painful necessity...

Because, the last time I tested it with a hard launch, it took awhile to hook. Maybe the engine wasn't fully warmed up. Maybe it just needs an oil change. It's okay for casual driving, but not hard driving. Are there any drawbacks to the Barnett clutch besides money? I've noticed that some prefer the OEM clutch to the Barnett, but not specifically for the Savage. The Savage seems to be known for having a weak clutch, and with that weak throwout arm, it seems that the best bet is some stickier plates with the factory springs. I think JOG said that he broke his throwout arm from merely shimming the springs.

On the other hand, maybe the lag is due to the time required to squeeze out the oil film? I don't want a clutch that goes a slippin' then grabs too hard. I just want it to grip firmly and smoothly without a shock load. I am guessing that stronger springs would do a better job at that? Would stickier plates with light springs cause problems with slip and shock, if you know what I mean? But, then, if I used stronger springs, wouldn't I would want a stronger throwout arm?   Can it be easily made? I don't need to jerk the stuffins out of it, I just want a strong grip. Not that I rev it too high... but when I simply pin the throttle and let go of the clutch, I want it to MOVE! Wouldn't you?

as far as I know, barnett makes 2 types, cork and kevlar.
so saying barnett don't mean anything.
I broke mine with HD springs.
I'm still have the HD springs with the new throwout lever for longer than the original lever.
so who's to say it wasn't due to some misadjustment?