Chain vs Belt vs Shaft

[Easy-X]

I saw a YT vid on belt drive conversion... for a push bike but recently I've discovered* there are plenty of belt drive conversion kits for motorbikes.

Just wondering on the pros & cons of such a thing. For example, does a belt dispense with the need for the cush drive?

Then I thought "can shaft-drives have torque converters?"

One of my many "you know nothing, Jon Snow!" threads


*As in "you twat, they've been out for ages"
____________________
Royal Enfield Continental GT 535, Husqvarna Vitpilen 401, Yamaha XSR700, Honda Rebel, Yamaha DT175, Suzuki SV650 (loan) Fazer 600, Keeway Superlight 125, 50cc turd scooter

[Riejufixing]

[MarJay]

Having owned 3 belt drive bikes, I feel like I can speak from some level of knowledge on the subject.

None of the bikes in question had cush drives. Although the Belt does not stretch, it does have some level of flex in it.

A belt drive is actually more expensive than the equivalent chain and sprockets because the belt pulleys need to be more accurately machined and mounted, and any damage to the pulley will wear the belt out quick smart. Belts themselves are often more expensive than chains and obviously harder to get. Tensioning is also an issue with some manufacturers going for crude fixed tensioners, and some putting in complex sprung tensioners - I think BMW produced a few bikes with no tensioner at all.

So why go belt drive? Well Buell went belt drive because Harley wanted them to differentiate from Japanese manufacturers (for no real reason other than fear!). There is no adjustment available because there is no need, so the wheel is always fixed and 100% in line with the front. You don't need to lube it, you don't need to adjust it, and belts can last about 40,000 miles if they are good quality and you make sure to check for little stones and stuff getting stuck between the belt and the pulley.

I think there is a limit in the power you can put through a belt, but they certainly do take a fair amount of torque.

I wouldn't change from a chain though, in fact there were loads of aftermarket manufacturers making chain conversion kits for belt drive bikes.
____________________
British beauty: Triumph Street Triple R; Loony stroker: KR1S; Track fun: GSXR750 L1; Commuter Missile: GSX-S1000F
Remember kids, bikes aren't like lego. You can't easily take a part from one bike and then fit it to another.

[Robby]

A belt can last a stupidly long time. Some Harley riders on US forums claim upwards of 100k miles from a belt. They can also handle significant torque. This shouldn't be surprising, the belt is using clever aramid materials.

I prefer them to a chain, because I can ignore the belt and check/change the tension when I need a new rear tyre. Basically the same reasons I like shaft drive.

Downsides, particularly for sports bikes. You are unlikely to find different sprocket sizes, so your gearing is set where it is. The fact that they aren't used in racing suggests they wouldn't work for racing - possibly trouble with heat at sustained silly speeds. They are typically a bit wider than a chain, which could be an issue in a physically small bike with an already amusing setup for the chain run.

Far more expensive than a chain setup, and I'm less trusting of the pattern parts out there. So that means that a belt and sprockets is likely to cost £300-500 to be sure of decent parts.

[Riejufixing]

[Shaft]

[Easy-X]

[MarJay]

[stinkwheel]

I'd go for belt drive all day long given the option, clean and minimal maintainance required. Mrs stinkwheels GPz305 was belt drive and it was tensioned exactly like a chain would be. Used to squeak sometimes.

In theory a chain delivers more power to the wheel, but that's a clean, well lubed and unworn chain.

Can I also present for consideration the fully enclosed chain drive. Those are good too.
____________________
“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.

[WD Forte]

[Nobby the Bastard]

Nobody has mentioned hydraulic motors....
____________________
trevor saxe-coburg-gotha:"Remember this simple rule - scooters are for men who like to feel the breeze on their huge, flapping cunt lips."
Triumph Sprint ST 1050

[WD Forte]

Yep, doable, but that's adding more complexity/cost though innit?
engine to power pump then pipework to hubs al la diggers n stuff

You could also have the engine drive a genny to power electric hubs

What about steam?
No one mentions steam any more, not fair
i wouldn't mind having a coal scuttle full of nutty slack
in place of the tank to power my chuff chuff bike
____________________
bikers smell of wee

[Robby]

[Pete.]

[stinkwheel]

Yamaha did some production bikes with a hydraulic motor in the front hub.
____________________
“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.

[Pete.]

[stinkwheel]

[stinkwheel]

And since were covering all our bases. Two early drive systems.

How about direct crank drive. Hildebrand & Wolfmüller. https://youtu.be/jbbsDds1tbU

Or Wheel mounted gnome rotary. Megola.
https://youtu.be/c4Cq49IDfOc

And of course the velosolex, roller-friction drive.
https://youtu.be/BLxuQ0S_Qg8
____________________
“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.

[Easy-X]

[stinkwheel]

[sickpup]

[TravisBickle]

[TravisBickle]

Sorry stinkwheel just seen you beat me to it. That's it the 2trac. I looked to buy one recently but couldn't find one for love nor money. Wonder why it didn't take on?
____________________
2024 BMW M1000XR
2021 Honda CMX500 Rebel S
2016 Triumph Tiger 1050 Sport