I think you could be slightly wrong regards the torque, with a lower primary reduction you would have lower torque, not higher
I am always reticent to say too much on mechanical engineering matters. A back ground in astronomy does not qualify me to pontificate on mechanical matters. In addition I know from when Chris was testing one of the first JE steering heads I had made that he is not only an astute rider, he is also a brave rider, having done some of the early testing in the snow. I was hoping that this discussion would bring one of the VOC's 'proper engineers' out of the wood work but no luck so far. I am not sure, but I think that the difference between me and Chris is as follows. It concerns the relationship between torque and power. It does not concern any gearing in the gearbox itself or ratios between the gearbox output and the rear wheel.
First an equation but don't worry. It will not cause brain damage.
TORQUE = (HP x 5252) / RPM
The 5252 figure is just a constant going back to the days of horses pulling barges and so on and the definition of horse power.
Putting some values into the equation then we can say that
TOQUE = (50 x 5252) / 5,250 (arbitrary rpm) which gives 50 foot pounds of torque
Now double the revs to 10.500
This now results in the Torque value dropping to 25 foot pounds, i.e. double the revs needs half the torque for a fixed value of horse power. So the way that I was envisaging this was that if we go from a standard Vin primary reduction of about 3:2 ( I don't have the exact figure to hand) to one of about 4:1 for the original Suzuki ratio then the torque would be reduced by a ratio equal to the difference between the Original Vin ratio and the Suzuki ration.
Is there an M.I.Mech E. in the house?