why no belt

[to v or not to v]

why are belt drives not more common on bikes? id imagine that they are a lot less faff than a chain.
____________________
current bike Yamaha Thunderace.
its old and fat, but its a damned good ride. the bikes not bad either.

[Islander]

Cost I'd imagine. Chains and sprockets are really cheap.

[Pete.]

They go from working to broken without any warning. Complete bastard to change too on most bikes.
____________________
a.k.a 'Geri'

132.9mph off and walked away. Gear is good, gear is good, gear is very very good

[Nobby the Bastard]

[stinkwheel]

They are cleaner and less faff. But race bike have chain.

A well oiled plain roller chain is more efficient than a belt. I strongly suspect a waxed x-ring chain is not.

Enclosed chains are another good idea you don't see a lot of.

The cost and difficulty changing is more than made up for in my oppinion by their longevity. Would I rather replace a chain and sprockets 2-3 times (and adjust and lube it between times, and clean the lube off the rest of the bike). Or do a belt and pulleys once, but have to drop the swingarm to do so? I'd go belt every time.

People say they go with no warning, but so do chains. I wasn't expecting any of the several chain breaks I've had over the years. It's not exactly straightforwards to replace/repair a broken chain at the side of the road anyway. In the unlikely case you are carrying a spare splitlink, it's probably broken somewhere you can't use it, or the chain's gone missing, or broken some other part of the bike too. (and, would you want to continue riding on a chain that's already snapped once?) You're most likely getting recovered in case of a broken belt or chain.
____________________
“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]

[Easy-X]

Harley seems to like them, reason enough to stay away

Seriously though not just swapping is a pain. Adjusting the slack requires a torque tool to deflect the belt with a pre-set force bit like using a torque wrench
____________________
Husqvarna Vitpilen 401, Yamaha XSR700, Honda Rebel, Yamaha DT175, Suzuki SV650 (loan) Fazer 600, Keeway Superlight 125, 50cc turd scooter

[Shaft]

[Pete.]

[Polarbear]

Why have a belt when you can have a shaft.
____________________
Triumph Trophy Launch Edition

[Shaft]

[Evil Hans]

I've followed my mate on his Thunderbird, and the constant fucking squeaking from the belt sends me batshit.
____________________
Triumph Sprint ST 1050. And it's Red.

[WD Forte]

[Robby]

[stinkwheel]

[Shaft]

[stinkwheel]

A high-end chain and sprocket set for a 600 supersport costs in the £150-180 ballpark. So a £200 belt, which I'd expect to last longer, isn't all that outrageous.
____________________
“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.

[mentalboy]

[to v or not to v]

[MarJay]

I had 3 Buell's with belts. The reason they aren't employed more is that the belt wheels need to be machined extremely accurately and finished with some kind of hardened finish. You might argue the same as a sprocket, but everybody and their dog produces thousands of sprockets every day, whereas that is not the case with belt pulleys.

The Buell pulleys were powder coated which could flake off with age, and then the belt would wear through. I had a couple of high mileage bikes with their original belts over 20,000 miles, but a single stone getting in between the belt and the pulley could snap the belt.

One advantage nobody has mentioned is that when it goes, it generally doesn't take the crankases out, or your toes off. It just falls to the floor and you lose drive. A belt also works like a cush drive absorbing power pulses, and is generally engineered so you never need to adjust the wheel alignment and also always have a consistent wheelbase. Also when you replace the belt you don't need new pulleys unless they are worn for other reasons. I think the Buell belts at one stage were about £60 which is a lot cheaper than a chain and sprockets. Buell quoted 12000 mile life on them though, although as I mentioned I had a couple that lasted 20,000 miles. Replacing the belt wasn't too bad either as my bikes had aftermarket springloaded tensioners.

More downsides though... the pulleys are heavy and compared to sprockets I Mean HEAVY. This is of course counteracted by the lightness of the belt itself. Also the stretchiness that provides that beautiful cushioning effect means that big power can stretch or break them, although the Buell 1125R had 170 odd BHP and worked OK. The race bikes had chain conversions though.

I like a belt for a road bike, and I'd have another with a belt, but it would never be a deal breaker not to have one, or a deal breaker to have one.

Chains are so ubiquitous
____________________
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.

[trevor saxe-coburg-gotha]

iirc my mate's xb12 belt went @ 30k
____________________
"Life is a sexually transmitted disease and the mortality rate is one hundred percent."

Mobylette Type 50 ---> Raleigh Grifter ---> Neval Minsk 125

[MCN]

Bekoz Hardley Dae Anything fit them to their bikes and Harleys are Ghey.
____________________
Disclaimer: The comments above may be predicted text and not necessarily the opinion of MCN.

[MCN]

You can get a belt drive system for a bicycle too.
____________________
Disclaimer: The comments above may be predicted text and not necessarily the opinion of MCN.

[pepperami]