both arguments seem to make sense when reading them and at first thought I was thinking that changing sprockets made perfect sense but now after going through it all I tend to agree more with Millietants view - to a point.
I'm shooting from the hip here as I know foc all about it and like everyone else it's just how I imagine it in my noggin but.......
for example lots of folk moan about high revving inline 4 engines such as the
power delivery "oh you've gotta rev them to get the power out", say for example the FZ6 compared to the FZS600 and the moan is that the old bike has more mid range. Well yes this is right but if you know that you're bike contains its power higher up the rev range then that is where you should be when you need the power - I think what folk really mean here is that they want to be in top gear as soon as possible and then complain when they have to change down gears to get to the power...more so than they would on another bike - the revs seem high or the gear seems too low to them - it is more about perception of what gear they are in or how much fuel economy they are getting rather than where exactly they should be in the rev range for performance.
so yes I agree, just choose your gears better for the majority of the time.
where I disagree is on this technicality - the transition of gears - ok I would say that nobody really needs any more thrust in 1st gear....if you are giving full throttle from the go in 1st and finding yourself still needing more acceleration then there's something wrong surely.
2nd gear is a possibility depending on what bike ie 600 or 1000...personally I wouldn't want any more oomph in 2nd on the thou.
3rd gear then - perhaps you find that being low in the revs in 3rd gear means that the bike is a little sluggish under full throttle until it gets to higher revs - so you could as we've discussed be in a lower gear, 2nd gear but then you might find yourself at that same road speed being far too high in the rev range in 2nd so that there ends up being a gear change needed right in the middle of where you need to be having that spread of power - this isn't ideal because I think everyone would rather not have the extra hassle of a gear change if it involves overtaking or if you often find yourself in this particular gear/rev range scenario it will become laborious - this is where I can see the benefit of changing the ratios to perhaps do away with that particular gear change at those road speeds.
As it happens on my Gen2 I have found that the most used gear/rev range scenario on normal British roads for me is for overtaking cars very swiftly on A roads whereby I've found that holding the revs high in 3rd gear at those road speeds allows me instant, powerful and smily faced oomph for approx a 2 car overtake before I'm changing to 4th gear and that's fine for me, if I was only getting passed 1 car or say almost getting passed 1 car before needing to look for 4th then id consider a sprocket change because passing 1 car is a common occurrence on the roads and it only takes 1 missed gear change to then be in world of shit or embarrassment - simply being in 4th gear at the beginning would mean a slower overtake so that is no good and being in 2nd gear would mean not enough useable revs left in the bank and again require a gear change mid overtake.
so that's my tuppence worth anyway, I think it depends really whether you often find yourself changing gear when youd rather not be - the required change may actually be in the opposite direction than you'd imagine....yes generally you may feel that you need more acceleration but in actual fact you could end up getting better real world results by making the gearing longer yet being able to stay in a lower gear for when you need that acceleration most ie " my bike is slow in 4th when I need to overtake....I need more acceleration" - make the gearing longer so that you can use 3rd for longer and use 4th more as a cruiser could be more beneficial maybe???