More thinking out loud: Final drive question, why not Belt drive or Shaft drive?

[rudebwoy85]

Again, Just thinking out loud.

I hear modern belt drives are more than up to the task, last longer than chains tend do (supposedly the life of a bike as I hear, but I find it hard to believe, afterall what lasts forever?), or what about shaft drives, virtually maintenance free.

I know I'm not the only lazy basta*d here who finds the 5-10 minute chore of oiling your chain a pain (kinda like doing your own laundry), but when you finally decide to wash your bike, there is always chainlube type gunk on the wheel, spockets and general area and this also prolongs the task of washing the bike. (likely why I've only washed it about 4 times since April).

The broader question generally is why do many still stay with the (signif' improved reliability O-ring admittedly) chain, something I've really been pondering with regard to the hypersports tourers sans BMW? It just seems less of a maintenance and mess issue. No doubt there are cons I just dont see. Those with more moto-knowledge than I please chime in. (the things you ponder when ur struck with insomnia at 4:00 am, whew!)

[Pig9r]

Chain drive is still the strongest thing going. With a shaft drive you have more weight (shaft and transfer case on rear wheel) and a decent loss in power to the rear wheel. Belts are good but not good enough for a sport bike. While bikes like the Boss Hoss have a belt final drive a belt couldn't stand up to the constant acceleration and deacceleration of a track day on a sport bike. A chain is still the all around best.

[Captain_Rat]

This was discussed in a previous post. And some guys actually did this to a 2002 S3 and offers a belt system for sale. Check it out HERE.

Capt.

[02Daytona955i]

Belt drive is not a new thing. TONS of industrial applications use belts and they're actually MORE durable than chain.

For the width, it's hard to beat a chain........................

[ELP_JC]

I much prefer a shaft final drive, even with the power losses and extra weight, but it's practically impossible to fit one.
A belt, however, is a viable option. That link looks promising. Sent an Email asking about the new S3s and a few other questions I have.
I've been dragging my feet on this 2nd bike just because the darn chain. It's not going to be a deal breaker, but I'd gladly welcome a mess-free belt, even if it lasts a bit less.
JC

[qc415]

belts are limited to around 100hp in a sport bike application(i think some buells use them), shafts are heavy and inefficient.

if you really wanna get hardcore lazy you can alway buy an automatic chain oiler, there are tons of them out there. personally though i've never really found the 30 seconds it takes to oil my chain a huge issue.

[ This message was edited by: qc415 on 2005-11-07 17:33 ]

[crashmasterd]

On 2005-11-07 17:30, qc415 wrote:
(i think some buells use them)

To my knowledge all new Buells use belt drives. Every one I've seen has.

Belt drives that are strong enough for really heavy bikes or high horsepower bikes are prohibitively heavy as well. I've seen the one on the S3 before, and it's size and installation do not fill me with confidence. Note that big twin Harley Davidsons use 1 1/2 inch wide belts, while the QPD product looks to be about 3/4 to 1 inch wide. (The web site fails to mention) For $850 you can buy a lot of top quality x-ring chains!

Also, belt drives are notorious horsepower robbers.

[ELP_JC]

You can actually put a belt on any bike if you want; the problem is SIZE. All those custom cruisers with big-a$$ engines have belts, but look at their size. Granted; a sport bike with a big belt would look like *****.
The big problem with belts is they should be much better protected than chains, and that's a challenge too.
So yes, I'd leave the chain alone, but got excited about an alternative a bit :hammer:

[littlefield]

I ask a Buell rider that question one time. He said the racers all switch to chains because it's easier and cheaper to change ratios.

[miker]

The belts on the link do look promising, but take it from a Harley owner, with a belt, that I've often thought of changing it over to a chain.

You see with a chain, you can repair it on the run, a belt that snaps is snapped and therefore toast and requires a tow. At least if you break a chain, you can add a spare link to get you home.

Belts must be aligned and adjusted correctly at all times. If they're not, they either snap or wear prematurely. They are also prone to pebbles putting holes in them and if that happens, they must be replaced.

Early model Harley's have a 1 1/2 inch belt, the later twin cams and Buells have a 1 inch belt, which is plenty for about 120hp, I've only ever seen them snap from bad alignment and adjustment.

To replace a belt, you need to remove the whole swing arm, with a chain, use a breaker and a joiner link (supplied with the chain usually) To change ratios, you may need different length belts.

Lastly, the last replacement I did on my Harley cost $1,600 AUD because I needed two pulleys, a belt and all the primary drive had to be removed and replaced.

Lube the chain, it will last well enough for the money. If you don't want to lube the chain, buy a bike with a shaft.

My $0.05

Mick

[ This message was edited by: miker on 2005-11-07 20:02 ]