Why aren't drive belts used more often?

[chris-red]

Other than Harley/Buell and mopeds not other bikes use drive belts to me they seem like a much better way of putting down the power.

I imagine they are lighter, cleaner, require less maintainence and are easier to change, so why aren't they used more often?
____________________
Well, you know what they say. If you want to save the world, you have to push a few old ladies down the stairs.
Skudd:- Perhaps she just thinks you are a window licker and is being nice just in case she becomes another Jill Dando.
WANTED:- Fujinon (Fuji) M42 (Screw on) lenses, let me know if you have anything.

[Ariel Badger]

They are less mechanically efficient at delivering power to the back wheel than a chain.
____________________
Bikers make great organ donors, get 115 on your licence today.

[BanditsHigh]

^^^ Are they ... and here's me thinking that the order of most efficient power transmission (i.e. least amount of power loss) was belt > chain > shaft!!

The main reason I'd say they are not used more often is down to cost ... a chain and sprockets are cheaper to produce than the equivalent belt and pulleys.

All the best ... Barry

[chris-red]

I would have thought then certain expensive bikes would have belts if cost was the only issue. If they are better that c&s why do race bikes/Ducati/MV etc. not use them.
____________________
Well, you know what they say. If you want to save the world, you have to push a few old ladies down the stairs.
Skudd:- Perhaps she just thinks you are a window licker and is being nice just in case she becomes another Jill Dando.
WANTED:- Fujinon (Fuji) M42 (Screw on) lenses, let me know if you have anything.

[elgard]

I had a Kwak EN450ltd that was belt drive.
I did like it,Hardly any maintenace but when it went on me i had to buy a genuine belt and that was £230 . I just couldn't find anybody that did aftermarket belts.But that was in the days before the internet.

[Timmeh]

There's no way I'd trust an overgrown fanbelt to deliver 150bhp to my back wheel, I think most jap engineers feel the same.
____________________
GSXR400 x2 | '94 RVF400 | '93 TZR125 4DL (again)
20:22:30 BLUEX5: i would love to be forced to undergo a**l plugging with different sizes
20:48:18 Temeluchus: comp you hunk of smouldering homos3x you

[D O G]

BMW F800S, ST and R use belt drive.

Which is one of the reasons I like them so much.

[extreme3d]

[The Shaggy D.A.]

You can repair a chain at the roadside with a split link. With a belt, you need a new one.
____________________
Chances are quite high you are not in my Monkeysphere, and I don't care about you. Don't take it personally.
Currently : Royal Enfield 350 Meteor
Previously : CB100N > CB250RS > XJ900F > GT550 > GPZ750R/1000RX > AJS M16 > R100RT > Bullet 500 > CB500 > LS650P > Bullet Electra X & YBR125 > Bullet 350 "Superstar" & YBR125 Custom > Royal Enfield Classic 500 Despatch Limited Edition (28 of 200) & CB Two-Fifty Nighthawk > ER5

[AngelGrinder]

[Noxious89123]

Because having a huge pulley on the back;
Exhibit A
https://www.motorcycledaily.com/050808middle2.jpg

Means extra unsprung weight. Every gram counts remember!
____________________
'06 Honda CBR125RW-6 ~ '00 Honda CBR600F-Y ~ '07 Honda CBR600RR-7 ~ Bikeless
'53 Ford Ka 1.3 ~ '03 Vauxhall Astra SRi 1.8 ~ '52 Vauxhall Astra SRi 2.2 ~ '53 Vauxhall Astra GSi

[Charlie]

I think a lot of the bike manufactures (mainly Japanese ones) have invested lots of money into chain technology and don't want to invest money again when their view is that chain drive is totally adequate.

I think it is a good idea having belt drives, the no maintenance bit being the main reason.
____________________
Past: Honda x8rs, Honda City fly, Honda Hornet 250, Honda VFR750, Yamaha xt600e.
Current: Honda CBR929RR & Yamaha XT660Z Tenere

[extreme3d]

[stinkwheel]

A new, well adjusted, well lubed roller chain (like they use in racing) is more efficient. How many people can hold their hand up and say their chain is like that all the time?

Belts need minimal maintainance, they need adjusting very infrequently (like, when you remove the wheel to change the tyre), don't need oiling and last around three times as long as a chain.

Last chain ans sprocket set I got was £115. So I'd have spent £345 on chain and sprockets, plus the time taken to fit them, plus the time pissing round cleaning and lubing them for every belt that needs replacing.

The girlfriend has one on her GPz305 and it's superb, I never have to touch it. It does squeak slightly but that's due to the early pulley design.

The reason they don't use belts is because bikers are set in their ways and fear change (as demonstrated in this thread). They therefore don't fit them because people won't buy them.

Anyone I know who has actually owned a belt drive bike thinks they are great.
____________________
“Rule one: Always stick around for one more drink. That's when things happen. That's when you find out everything you want to know.”
I did the 2010 Round Britain Rally on my 350 Bullet. 89 landmarks, 3 months, 9,500 miles.

[neil.]

[doggone]

They won't normally fail completely, you'll get a degree of shredding first which yo should spot.

The power handling argument is spurious too - unless the belt used is built to cost instead of strength.
Combined harvesters run on drive belts and they weigh many tons and engine considerably more powerful than a motorbike.

[LordShaftesbu...]

[neil.]

[Reppyboyo]

I would love a belt drive on my Speed Triple.

Think replacing the belt would mean taking the swing arm off though which would be a bitch.

[s44678]

Surely it's down to chains being more suitable for racing:

You can mess with sprocket sizes, adjust wheelbase inside the paddock and then easily make up a chain to fit in minutes.

With a belt, it has to be moulded to a specific size using serious equipment. Basically it's a lot less flexible (pardon the pun).

Fine for the road where your bike setup is pretty consistent, but not very good for a racing team I wouldn't imagine.

And thus, like lots of other things (helmets, fairings, paint schemes) we like our bikes to look like race bikes whether the technology has any real benefit on the road or not.

[extreme3d]

[Kickstart]

Hi

The reputation of the belt drive systems used on some 1980s Kawasakis was that they lasted a bit longer than chains of the time (but within the margins for a well looked after chain, certainly one with a properly set up scot oiler).

They are efficient (a good condition chain is better) and need little adjustment

Down side is that the belts tend to fail will very little warning. They are expensive (although that might change if they were more commonly used so more independent suppliers), require the rear suspension stripping to replace (which is a real pain if you want to play with gearing) and not resistant to damage.

From memory there was someone racing a 250 GP bike in the late 1980s using belt drive for a while.

All the best

Keith
____________________
Traxpics, track day and racing photographs - Bimota Forum - Bike performance / thrust graphs for choosing gearing

[Ariel Badger]

[Kickstart]

Hi

Trouble is that as a chain wears and it stretches its efficiency gets worse.

All the best

Keith
____________________
Traxpics, track day and racing photographs - Bimota Forum - Bike performance / thrust graphs for choosing gearing

[AngelGrinder]

So, basically.

Chain is good for racing because it is better, as they only ever use brand new ones. Chain is better because you can change it alot quicker.

Chain on road is good because racers have it and because that's where the technology is, so it's pointless for the manufacturers to bother doing stuff that would be better for the road?
____________________
Currently Riding - 2002 Aprilia RSV1000 Mille