Results 1 to 88 of 88
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    845

    Just Curious- Belt Drive- WHY?

    SO- Spot seems to be sticking with the belt drive on their new 29er Cream bikes. Why? Does anyone really use one in conditions other than commuting? Nobody here in the northeast that I know uses one. Just curious why the application is still considered viable for a serious MTB setup vs. a commuter where I can see its application.

  2. #2
    4 Niners
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,124
    Zero maintenance for 10,000 miles.
    Full rigid SS, Hardtail SS, Hardtail Geared, Full Suspension Geared.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    845
    Curious- what kind of conditions do you ride in? If this were the case I'd think more people would be riding them. As I was thinking about it- the carry an extra belt element may also be a big reason. Do you carry a belt with you just in case?

  4. #4
    4 Niners
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,124
    I don't have a belt bike, but the belts are lasting that long now. Do all the Harley Davidson riders carry an extra belt?
    Full rigid SS, Hardtail SS, Hardtail Geared, Full Suspension Geared.

  5. #5
    4 Niners
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,124
    The reason they are not that popular is chains are 98% efficient and belts are 93% efficient. Changing gear ratios on a belt bike is expensive and requires more parts. You have to have a specially designed frame. To be approved by Gates, the frame can only flex a limited amount under pedaling forces. This can make it harder to get a good ride quality.
    Full rigid SS, Hardtail SS, Hardtail Geared, Full Suspension Geared.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    152
    Im with you on this. I see belt bikes from time to time. Its more of a gimmick to me on mtn bikes. I know the benefits crazy long life, less parts wear, super quiet, and basically maintenance free. It just doesn't improve enough on the chain for it outweigh its cost and awkwardness in the mountain world.
    2010 D440 Redline Rigid 1x9
    2011 Trek Remedy 8 1x10
    2012 Jamis Dragon 2x10
    2013 Diamondback Sortie 3 1x10

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    600
    I have a belt bike. Its not maintenance free. And yes, I am doing it correctly. My friend that works for Spot said so. I have also broken a belt. I walked home. No thanks.
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    If I told you I saw a unicorn ****ing a leprechaun trail side, you'd probably be suspicious.

  8. #8
    Crash Dummy In Training
    Reputation: PauLCa916's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    1,432
    I have wondered how the drag is on a belt drive compared to a chain.
    I use to race Remote Control cars and bought a belt drive transmission and the drag was so bad it was hard to gear the car so the batteries would last a full race.
    Oh and to the above question "Do Harley Riders carry an extra belt ?" I never did and never broke one on my 1991 soft Tail Springer and I rode it hard for 14,000 miles.
    ​​
    2015 Flyxii / ENVE /Chris King Carbon 29'er H.T.
    SRAM XX1
    2012 Stump Jumper Comp 29'er H.T. SRAM XX1
    1997 Rock Hopper / Rock Shox Recon Silver / 1 x 10 SRAM X9 XO Mix XT V Brake system

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    75
    I'm on my second bike fitted with a belt drive with no issues so far. I ride a lot of rocky tech sections here in AZ where I've snapped multiple chain links on my geared bikes doing climbs. Granted there are drawbacks to a belt drive system, as mentioned, but there are pros and cons to everything bike related. I'm hoping not to have to hoof it out someday if the belt snaps, but until then. The good thing about frames made to take belts is that I can always switch to a chain system if I needed to.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,462
    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy View Post
    Zero maintenance for 10,000 miles.
    That's a pretty good reason over there.
    Last edited by Max24; 03-02-2015 at 06:43 PM.

  11. #11
    Old Punk
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    530
    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy View Post
    The reason they are not that popular is chains are 98% efficient and belts are 93% efficient. Changing gear ratios on a belt bike is expensive and requires more parts. You have to have a specially designed frame. To be approved by Gates, the frame can only flex a limited amount under pedaling forces. This can make it harder to get a good ride quality.
    V belts have a 95% efficency, but synchronous belts, such as gates drive, are 98-99% efficient. V belts use a wedging action to drive the cogs, but synchronous belts and cogs are timed (notched).
    Synchronous belt drives are equally as efficent as a chain drive, have ZERO stretch(in theory), require no lubricant, are impervious to water, dirt and oil and handle misalignment better.

    However, this is all based on my industrial machine building experience and knowledge. I've never owned or ridden a belt drive bike. But chains and belts are chains and belts, no matter what type of machine it is.
    '09 Specialized Rockhopper expert 29
    Born 26" trials
    '07 Specialized Allez

  12. #12
    4 Niners
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,124
    Even Gates admits that the efficiency of there belts is 93%. Chains flex more easily around the gears and the Gates belts have high and low interlocking areas that cause friction.
    Full rigid SS, Hardtail SS, Hardtail Geared, Full Suspension Geared.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    490
    I had two belt driven spot's and they both equally sucked. I'd throw the belt on steep climbs and on some quick bursts. I took both to the LBS to have them look at it to make sure I set everything up correctly, and neither of us could find a flaw in either bike. Sold 'em both and when I got them this was a new thing, so I luckily didn't loose too much. I'd call it my biggest bike related waste of money. Maybe they have gotten better, but I'm not throwing another dime at that mess.
    Livin' the dream.

  14. #14
    4 Niners
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,124
    The original belt drives were absolutely beta stuff that should have never been sold. The belts would come off unless they were so tight that the bearings were binding. This was due to frame flex and the belts were designed with the idea that they would be in perfect alignment at all times. If you want to see what I am talking about, lock your front and rear brake and step on a pedal that the crank arm is at the 9 o'clock position. You will see the frame flex. This is a normal quality of bicycles. Gates redesigned the belts with notches in the pulleys and raised areas on the belts. This allowed the frame to flex some and the belt to still stay on with reasonable (but still high) tension. But further increased frictional losses (from tthe belt, not from the bearings). The current belts do not fly off as the early ones did but have the limitations that I have mentioned in earlier posts. The current belts are also less likely to break. So the current state of the technology is that it works, but it is not efficient, it is expensive, it is hard to change gearing, you must have a frame with a break in the tubing, etc. But, they do now consistently last 10,000 miles for most users without almost any maintenance.

    I know all this because i was an early fan that wanted them to be a great success, but I will never pull the trigger until they solve the many problems. I have followed many threads for several years about this topic. If you want a zero maintenance drive system and don't care about cost and are building a frame and efficiency is not a priority then this is your ideal choice. For everyone else, (which is 98+% of all cyclists) don't even consider this.

    So the the original poster, this is why you don't see this!
    Full rigid SS, Hardtail SS, Hardtail Geared, Full Suspension Geared.

  15. #15
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    both chains and belts have pros and cons.

    the original CDC gates belt drives required too much tension and ate hub and bottom bracket bearings. they also could be hypersensitive to alignment issues. the new CDX system doesn't suffer from these maladies.

    i have two spot brand bikes now, a rocker and HB, am in the process of building a cream, and also recently converted a karate monkey ops to belt drive (with nothing more than a hacksaw). so needless to say i'm a fan. it's quiet, maintenance free, no transfer of chain lube/gunk to legs or anything else, absorbs tight spots in the drivetrain making them disappear, and is very smooth.

    it's a very viable option for "a serious MTB setup" if running a singlespeed, but somewhat less if gears are desired since an IGH is generally considered less desirable for a "serious mtb". i plan on building a serious belt drive mtb with a sram 8sp IGH just for giggles since "serious" often depends more on the rider than the machine.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  16. #16
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by PeopleForScience View Post
    I have a belt bike. Its not maintenance free. And yes, I am doing it correctly. My friend that works for Spot said so. I have also broken a belt. I walked home. No thanks.
    two options: either you got a defective belt or you're doing it wrong.

    if you broke a chain on a traditional bicycle would you give up on that too? ever had a flat tyre on a bike? still running pneumatic tyres on it? you get the idea...
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    600
    I guess you cannot read. My friend that works for spot set them up. They are center track belts too. I've broken multiple chains, and repaired them trail side and rode home. Good luck repairing a belt.
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    If I told you I saw a unicorn ****ing a leprechaun trail side, you'd probably be suspicious.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    290
    I don't have one. I really want a Redline Monobelt though. Here's why:

    1.) Quietness -- definitely number one. I love quiet bikes.
    2.) Uniqueness -- fun to try something different in the MTB world.
    3.) Simplicity -- IMO, while less efficient, a belt is simpler and more elegant than a chain.

    Cycling is a hobby for me, and trying different types of bikes is fun. Belt drive has a lot of tilt, and even if the cons outweigh the pros, there's a good chance I'd still be happy with a Monobelt. I wouldn't be worried about 5% loss in efficiency, singlespeed (or internally geared hubs) are generally not going to be the fastest option anyway.

    As far as the spare belt goes, I think I would definitely carry one except during, e.g., a singlespeed race. Seems like you could zip tie it to the seat stay or down tube easily enough. Probably a matter of time before you see some sort of commercial cage mounted belt holster. I also snowmobile, and even though belts don't break all that often, I don't think I would take my sled a half mile without a spare belt. Peace of mind.

    With all of that said, I don't think I would get a belt drive as my only bike. More of a 3rd or 4th bike kind of situation.
    '12 Santa Cruz Superlight 29 | '12 Santa Cruz Butcher | '06 Specialized Allez Comp | '81 Schwinn Converted Fixie

  19. #19
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by PeopleForScience View Post
    I guess you cannot read. My friend that works for spot set them up. They are center track belts too. I've broken multiple chains, and repaired them trail side and rode home. Good luck repairing a belt.
    at no time did you say your friend at spot set them up. you said, "i am doing it correctly, my friend at spot said so" which in no way implies anyone other than YOU set it up. in addition to not comprehending what you yourself said, you seemed to also fail to comprehend that i wasn't disputing whether or not your belt was set up correctly.

    perhaps next time get your facts straight before being such a tool, eh?

    neither chains nor belts are failproof, but belt failure is possibility vs. probability. is it possible for a non-defective and not worn out properly adjusted belt to fail? certainly. is it probable? nope.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    600
    Quote Originally Posted by monogod View Post
    at no time did you say your friend at spot set them up. you said, "i am doing it correctly, my friend at spot said so" which in no way implies anyone other than YOU set it up. in addition to not comprehending what you yourself said, you seemed to also fail to comprehend that i wasn't disputing whether or not your belt was set up correctly.

    perhaps next time get your facts straight before being such a tool, eh?

    neither chains nor belts are failproof, but belt failure is possibility vs. probability. is it possible for a non-defective and not worn out properly adjusted belt to fail? certainly. is it probable? nope.
    I'm not am expert in language but this line petty much Sums up you saying that it's my fault. "two options: either you got a defective belt or you're doing it wrong."

    So here is how I see it, you are clearly better than me and most certainly must have a massive penis. I'm sorry that I ever contested that. I was just trying to save someone the time, money, and hassles that I experienced.

    Out.
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    If I told you I saw a unicorn ****ing a leprechaun trail side, you'd probably be suspicious.

  21. #21
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by PeopleForScience View Post
    I'm not am expert in language but this line petty much Sums up you saying that it's my fault. "two options: either you got a defective belt or you're doing it wrong."

    So here is how I see it, you are clearly better than me and most certainly must have a massive penis. I'm sorry that I ever contested that. I was just trying to save someone the time, money, and hassles that I experienced.

    Out.
    no expert indeed. what i was suggesting is that you had a defective belt and illustrated that sometimes parts we count on fail. nor was it a personal insult/refutation to suggest that it is very, very rare for a non-defective, correctly installed/aligned belt to spontaneously break as you've reported - i.e. "possibility vs. probability".

    like you, i too know people at spot/gates and have discussed this very issue at length and was told that most of the time belt failure is due to improper handling/installation/alignment. granted, i didn't get actual percentage figures on spontaneous belt failure like you've reported, but i'm guessing it's VERY low. belts are a proven and reliable drive system in use globally on a wide array of industrial, aerospace, motorcycle, and automotive applications - and the cdx system is proving itself to be the same on mtb, road, cross, commuter, and touring bikes.

    so all things considered it would seem you're trying to "save someone" from the exception to the rule.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    845

    gates vs. harley? c'mon.

    Maybe the Harley belts not breaking have something to do with the volume of belt....not a good comparison my man.

    Just Curious- Belt Drive- WHY?-1102_hrbp_29_z-2001_harley_davidson_road_glide-engine_and_belt_drive.jpg

  23. #23
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by jomissa View Post
    Maybe the Harley belts not breaking have something to do with the volume of belt....not a good comparison my man.
    you do know that gates MAKES harly's belts, right?

    for one thing that is the primary belt, not the final drive belt.

    for another, harleys don't come from the factory with primary drive belts. that picture is of an aftermarket conversion. in other words, the chain drive was electively removed in favor of a belt. lots of custom and performance builders go this route because belts are smoother, require less maintenance, and look cool - just like for bicycles.

    for another, it would stand to reason that an engine putting out 60-120hp would need a more robust belt to transfer power from the engine to the transmission (primary drive belt) than would be needed for a human putting out less than .5 hp to transfer power from the cranks to the rear wheel.

    for yet another, due to the advances in belt technology many of the newer harleys use 1" and even 20mm wide final drive belts. interesting when considering the gates cdx system for bicycles uses a 12mm belt.

    so in all actuality, the 12mm wide cycling belt for a .5hp (if that) application is FAR more robust for the application than a 20mm final drive belt for a 60hp application.

    so yeah... it's a good comparison, my man.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by monogod View Post
    so in all actuality, the 12mm wide cycling belt for a .5hp (if that) application is FAR more robust for the application than a 20mm final drive belt for a 60hp application.

    so yeah... it's a good comparison, my man.
    I agree, but I would probably say look at the torque and not the power. I would think that spinning a belt fast--power--would not stress a belt as much as tensile forces--torque. Regardless, the comparison still holds as you're looking at around 100 ft lbs at high RPM on a 20mm-40mm belt vs maybe 50-60 ft lbs at low RPM on a 12mm belt. Plus the motorcycle belt has to contend with engine vibrations, engine movement, parasitics of the belt tensioner, etc. The bicycle belt has to deal with frame flex and maybe off center chainri...uhm...beltrings?
    '12 Santa Cruz Superlight 29 | '12 Santa Cruz Butcher | '06 Specialized Allez Comp | '81 Schwinn Converted Fixie

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by monogod View Post
    belts are a proven and reliable drive system in use globally on a wide array of industrial, aerospace, motorcycle, and automotive applications - and the cdx system is proving itself to be the same on mtb, road, cross, commuter, and touring bikes...
    I was aware of belt-drive when I was into motorcycles.

    One big quibble: IIRC, belts fall down when they're exposed to dirt/grit/mud. Any grit between the belt and pulleys makes them act like sandpaper on each other.

    Again, just IIRC, but this is why you never, ever see belt drive on dirt bikes – they're on tourers and cruisers.

    Why somebody would think that they would do well on a MTB, I don't understand...

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    31
    If you're riding a Harley, you probably have so many other things to worry about...

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    845
    I clearly exceeded my gearhead quotient with that post. If I was worth my salt I'd know that was not the belt in debate. DUH! To those of us less informed....notice has been served! I ride bicycles....never been on a motorcycle.

    Quote Originally Posted by monogod View Post
    you do know that gates MAKES harly's belts, right?

    for one thing that is the primary belt, not the final drive belt.

    for another, harleys don't come from the factory with primary drive belts. that picture is of an aftermarket conversion. in other words, the chain drive was electively removed in favor of a belt. lots of custom and performance builders go this route because belts are smoother, require less maintenance, and look cool - just like for bicycles.

    for another, it would stand to reason that an engine putting out 60-120hp would need a more robust belt to transfer power from the engine to the transmission (primary drive belt) than would be needed for a human putting out less than .5 hp to transfer power from the cranks to the rear wheel.

    for yet another, due to the advances in belt technology many of the newer harleys use 1" and even 20mm wide final drive belts. interesting when considering the gates cdx system for bicycles uses a 12mm belt.

    so in all actuality, the 12mm wide cycling belt for a .5hp (if that) application is FAR more robust for the application than a 20mm final drive belt for a 60hp application.

    so yeah... it's a good comparison, my man.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Welnic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    874
    Quote Originally Posted by ghost_03 View Post
    I agree, but I would probably say look at the torque and not the power. I would think that spinning a belt fast--power--would not stress a belt as much as tensile forces--torque. Regardless, the comparison still holds as you're looking at around 100 ft lbs at high RPM on a 20mm-40mm belt vs maybe 50-60 ft lbs at low RPM on a 12mm belt. Plus the motorcycle belt has to contend with engine vibrations, engine movement, parasitics of the belt tensioner, etc. The bicycle belt has to deal with frame flex and maybe off center chainri...uhm...beltrings?
    So your just off the cuff guess is that a Harley has about twice the torque of a cyclist?

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by Welnic View Post
    So your just off the cuff guess is that a Harley has about twice the torque of a cyclist?
    Yes. The difference is that the Harley spins with that amount of torque at 5k+ RPM, while the cyclist spins at ~100 RPM, so the Harley is making WAY more power, but not WAY more torque.

    You don't have to take my word for it. Harley Davidson publishes torque specs and 100 is pretty common for them I think, and even on the high side for some motorcycles. Pro rider torque specs aren't necessarily measured, but if I'm standing with all of my 160 lbs on a 175mm crank (and not even pulling up on the handlebars) some basic math will show that that is 44.8 ft lbs.
    '12 Santa Cruz Superlight 29 | '12 Santa Cruz Butcher | '06 Specialized Allez Comp | '81 Schwinn Converted Fixie

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Welnic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    874
    Yes, the engine generates about 100 ft/lbs of torque. But that goes through the primary drive into the transmission, and then from the transmission to the belt drive. Both of those gear the power down, which decreases rpm and multiplies torque. So in first gear the belt drive has about around 600-700 ft/lbs being transmitted through it.

  31. #31
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,951
    I love my Spot Honey Badger and the belt is spot on (pun intended).

    No regrets with the belt drive and my riding conditions are some of the most difficult on the east cost. I live in Western NC (Pisgah National Forrest, Bent Creek, DuPont State Forest)
    Just stick it in granny and start grinding.

  32. #32
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,951
    BTW, I have getting close to 1000 miles on my Spot with zero issues and zero maintenance on my belt from day 1.

    Belts are more expensive than chains but supposedly last longer.
    Also I look at all the money I save on cleaners and chain lube over the life of the belt.
    I don't carry a spare belt with me as I am not really that worried about braking it.
    Maybe one day it will bite me in the ass.

    Most the bad opinions on belts are from those who had the old system or have never had one but there will be a few people that insist theirs is set up right but have had nothing but problems.
    Just stick it in granny and start grinding.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by Welnic View Post
    Yes, the engine generates about 100 ft/lbs of torque. But that goes through the primary drive into the transmission, and then from the transmission to the belt drive. Both of those gear the power down, which decreases rpm and multiplies torque. So in first gear the belt drive has about around 600-700 ft/lbs being transmitted through it.
    I assumed we were talking about primary drive belts off a crankshaft as thats what was in the photo posted, and more akin to what I am used to with the cvt belt in snowmobiles which connects a clutch directly on the crankshaft to the track. Certainly a transmission being involved changes things.

    Regardless, upon investigating it appears that primary belts are usually wider than final drive belts (which i actually didnt know existed), so I guess more torque does not directly translate to a wider belt. Ya got me.

    Anyway, back on topic, another reason I want a belt drive bike is so I dont have to deal with as much grease/lube/stickiness/etc. Grease is one of my least favorite parts of bikes, cars, etc.
    '12 Santa Cruz Superlight 29 | '12 Santa Cruz Butcher | '06 Specialized Allez Comp | '81 Schwinn Converted Fixie

  34. #34
    psycho cyclo addict
    Reputation: edubfromktown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,343
    I am contemplating checking one out because I acquired a custom steel frame that comes with S&S couplers and a "belt ring".

    Ollie Whalley won the 2,740 mi Tour Divide running one a couple of years back (he changed belts part way into it and said it was easier than installing a new chain).

    On the flip side:

    I have a 7-speed chain on a bike installed in 1995 that shows no signs of quitting anytime soon. I typically get ~1k miles out of single speed chains (Nashbar cheapy 8-speed) and more miles out of Shimano XT/XTR 9-speed ones that are on my other 29er's.

    Whipperman White Star 108 chains are a lot beefier/stiffer than typical single speed MTB chains.
    【ツ】 eDub 【ツ】

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Welnic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    874
    I think that the primary belt is wider because it can be, it doesn't have the restrictions on its width like the tire and all of that other stuff between the transmission output and the rear wheel. The primary is a perfect place for a chain since it runs in an enclosed oil bath. The newest Harley engines use gears instead of a chain.

    Having ridden both motorcycles and bicycles for many years I had a good feel for how much more torque motorcycles have at the rear wheel, so it was interesting to me to figure out where that extra torque comes from considering the actual torque of the engine.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PoisonDartFrog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    656
    So, to summarize:

    Cons:
    Limited to single speed
    Need a special frame
    Non-repairable if it breaks, must be entirely replaced

    Pros:
    Slightly more efficient than a chain (debatable)
    Slightly less maintenance than a chain
    Novelty factor
    Mind your own religion.

  37. #37
    Neg reppers r my biatches
    Reputation: FoShizzle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    17,250
    why? just like carbon...and 29er wheel size...and 650b....and suspension.....and hydraulic brakes....absolutely no reason whatsoever other than MARKETING and thank goodness for companies that retardation runs rampant in the MTB community.

    there is nothing better about any of the aforementioned dynamics, to include belt drives, other than to pose a little better at the trailhead to compensate for your insecurities.

    the only radical improvement in the entire MTB market that is tangible is a gravity dropper post.

  38. #38
    4 Niners
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,124
    Less efficient than a chain especially the newest incarnation.
    Full rigid SS, Hardtail SS, Hardtail Geared, Full Suspension Geared.

  39. #39
    4 Niners
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,124
    And not really debatable, since Gates admits this.
    Full rigid SS, Hardtail SS, Hardtail Geared, Full Suspension Geared.

  40. #40
    Clueless Bastard
    Reputation: WA-CO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    684
    Having owned a first generation gates belt bike, my evaluation could be summarized as a novel idea, but the ability to execute well was very limited. I liked the super clean drivetrain, and lack of noise, and the promise of increased lifespan.

    However when all is said and done, I'd be hard pressed to do it again. Perhaps a world touring Rohloff bike might be a great application for belt technology. Or today's stage 5 of the tour.

  41. #41
    blet drive
    Reputation: JUNGLEKID5's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,164
    love the set up on my xxix. yes it took some time to get it set up properly but man is it smooth. I have had 4 years of hard new England riding on it and still going strong..
    Save a tree & wipe your butt with an owl.
    Thank your local Sierra Club.

  42. #42
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by Welnic View Post
    The newest Harley engines use gears instead of a chain.
    nope.

    victory and indians do. but not harleys.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Welnic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    874
    The Harley Davidson Revolution engine, which is in their V-Rod motorcycles, uses gears instead of chains for the primary drive.

    2014 V-Rod Muscle | VRSCF Drag Motorcycle | Harley-Davidson USA

    As an aside, I have a engine which has 650 ft/lbs of torque at 2900 rpms and and weighs about 480 lbs.

  44. #44
    Neg reppers r my biatches
    Reputation: FoShizzle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    17,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Welnic View Post
    The Harley Davidson Revolution engine, which is in their V-Rod motorcycles, uses gears instead of chains for the primary drive.

    2014 V-Rod Muscle | VRSCF Drag Motorcycle | Harley-Davidson USA

    As an aside, I have a engine which has 650 ft/lbs of torque at 2900 rpms and and weighs about 480 lbs.
    not relevant, v-rods are not even harleys. they have zero street cred and SOA would never consider them a harley and thats good enough for me

  45. #45
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by Welnic
    The newest Harley engines use gears instead of a chain.
    Quote Originally Posted by monogod
    nope.

    victory and indians do. but not harleys.
    Quote Originally Posted by Welnic View Post
    The Harley Davidson Revolution engine, which is in their V-Rod motorcycles, uses gears instead of chains for the primary drive.

    2014 V-Rod Muscle | VRSCF Drag Motorcycle | Harley-Davidson USA

    As an aside, I have a engine which has 650 ft/lbs of torque at 2900 rpms and and weighs about 480 lbs.
    that would be a great point except for the fact that's not harley's newest engine. the revolution was introduced over 12 years ago and was only used in one model until a variant was used in the street 750 and 500. ALL the rest have had and continue to use chain driven primary, including harley's NEWEST engine - the project rushmore.

    as an aside, that sounds like a fun ride.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Welnic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    874
    Thanks for the info. I haven't paid attention to motorcycles for a while, I was just poking around on their site looking for torque info. I just knew that it had more "modern" features than the Harley engines I knew about, so I assumed it was the newest.

    The engine I have has two push rod driven valves per cylinder. It is a technological marvel.

  47. #47
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    meh, no worries. i discover new stuff all the time too. a day without learning is a day wasted.

    my harley has the same. but then again, so does a chevy small block. so you gonna keep teasing and being vague or give a little more insight into this mystery motor of yours?
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  48. #48
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by Bimmer74 View Post
    I was aware of belt-drive when I was into motorcycles.

    One big quibble: IIRC, belts fall down when they're exposed to dirt/grit/mud. Any grit between the belt and pulleys makes them act like sandpaper on each other.

    Again, just IIRC, but this is why you never, ever see belt drive on dirt bikes – they're on tourers and cruisers.

    Why somebody would think that they would do well on a MTB, I don't understand...
    well, not the sole reason. there's also the aspect of tension. easier to keep spec belt tension with 2-5" of travel than with 10-14".

    be that as it may, they do very well on a MTB even in muddy, sloppy conditions.

    dirt/sand/grit doesn't build up in the cdx belt as it is a self-cleaning design. the cdx system is a proven system in all conditions that doesn't disintegrate itself due to sandpaper effect.

    i've got enough faith in it due to its proven performance that i plan on riding the great divide on a belt drive ss or igh either next year or in '16 so we'll see how that works out. flawlessly, i suspect.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jkidd_39's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    988
    Quote Originally Posted by monogod View Post
    i have two spot brand bikes now, a rocker and HB, am in the process of building a cream, and also recently converted a karate monkey ops to belt drive (with nothing more than a hacksaw).
    Pics please?!

    A man willing to customize a frame with a hacksaw is someone that needs to be taking lots of pics..

    I like your style sir!

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Welnic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    874
    Quote Originally Posted by monogod View Post
    meh, no worries. i discover new stuff all the time too. a day without learning is a day wasted.

    my harley has the same. but then again, so does a chevy small block. so you gonna keep teasing and being vague or give a little more insight into this mystery motor of yours?
    It's made in Russia and works as well upside down as right side up. And looking at just the engine it is hard to tell which way is right side up.

  51. #51
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by jkidd_39 View Post
    Pics please?!

    A man willing to customize a frame with a hacksaw is someone that needs to be taking lots of pics..

    I like your style sir!
    wish granted!

    pretty much just pulled it out of the box and cut it before i even unwrapped it.

    before the mod:



    about to cut:



    the cut:



    finished product:



    more info and pics here and here.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  52. #52
    Pixie Dust Addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,349
    Quote Originally Posted by FoShizzle View Post
    why? just like carbon...and 29er wheel size...and 650b....and suspension.....and hydraulic brakes....absolutely no reason whatsoever other than MARKETING and thank goodness for companies that retardation runs rampant in the MTB community.

    there is nothing better about any of the aforementioned dynamics, to include belt drives, other than to pose a little better at the trailhead to compensate for your insecurities.

    the only radical improvement in the entire MTB market that is tangible is a gravity dropper post.
    I have to say that my single speed cred on our weekly club rides went through the roof when I rolled up on my belt drive Ventana. I really enjoy it when the belt is clean and my bike is silent when I'm pedaling. I've never had a problem with the belt breaking or derailing, even when my 200+ pounds are mashing the pedals as hard as I can to make it up a climb. With Industry Nine hubs, the connection from my feet to the rear wheel feels more direct than any other bike I've owned. The only downside I've experienced is when I ride in dusty conditions much, the belt will start making noise and I need to clean it with soap and water and put some silicone spray lube on it to quiet it back down.

    If I was going to do it again, I would definitely keep my options open and get a frame that was belt-capable.

  53. #53
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,951
    Quote Originally Posted by PoisonDartFrog View Post
    So, to summarize:

    Cons:
    Limited to single speed No, you can get internal geared hubs
    Need a special frame Yes
    Non-repairable if it breaks, must be entirely replaced Yes

    Pros:
    Slightly more efficient than a chain (debatable) I would say the opposite and not debatable since it is on Gates own website
    Slightly less maintenance than a chain I would say a lot less since other than hosing it off I have done nothing to maintain mine in almost 1000 miles
    Novelty factor I guess. It does strike up a lot of conversations but I like chatting with people.
    ...
    Just stick it in granny and start grinding.

  54. #54
    psycho cyclo addict
    Reputation: edubfromktown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,343
    Quote Originally Posted by PoisonDartFrog View Post
    So, to summarize:

    Cons:
    Limited to single speed
    Need a special frame
    Non-repairable if it breaks, must be entirely replaced

    Pros:
    Slightly more efficient than a chain (debatable)
    Slightly less maintenance than a chain
    Novelty factor
    I'll add:

    According to long time local guru who was a huge proponent until ~6 months ago:

    Better chance for success for a belt implementation on a road/cross frame where there aren't so many rocks, logs, etc.

    Best use case of all is on commuter bike.

    I'm sticking with ring/cog and Whipperman White Star 108 mondo beefy chain on my latest rigid 29er creation.
    【ツ】 eDub 【ツ】

  55. #55
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    i'll add that neither a belt nor a chain are designed or suited for constantly bashing rocks and logs and NEITHER will hold up well doing so. thus, for someone who's constantly bashing logs and rocks with their chainring a belt wouldn't be a good choice and they should go with a standard chain setup with a beefy bash guard. or learn how to properly clear obstacles.

    sounds like your "guru" was using parts for applications they weren't designed for, has poor riding skills (or both) yet then wants to bad mouth the equipment.

    weak sauce...
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  56. #56
    psycho cyclo addict
    Reputation: edubfromktown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,343
    Sure- neither belt or chain are designed for contact with rocks or logs however, particularly the latter happens on trails at times for me and I imagine others too (some logs are too large for my aging/sagging bones to get all air over).

    I've run all my single speeds with no bash guard and they've left an imprint on many logs with no ill effects on chain or ring. I had run cheapy Nashbar 8-speed chains on my SS and now have gone to beefier Whipperman's that are reminiscent of a smaller version of a moto chain.

    The big rings on my geared bikes have also left plenty of bite marks in wood and haven't ended up worse for wear either (occasionally a rock hit has bent or snapped a tooth- like 1 out of 40 which is no biggie over 3-4 years of hammering on it).

    The gent I speak of has mucho MTB skills of long duration- gravity stuff too (freeride, pump track, ...) that I no longer mess with. He had also ridden a belt drive for years.

    He launches off TTFs such as this for example:

    Just Curious- Belt Drive- WHY?-dangerwillrobinson.jpg
    【ツ】 eDub 【ツ】

  57. #57
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,951
    The funny thing is, most the belt hatters have never had one.
    The majority of those who have had one and don't like them, were 1st gen belt owners.
    There is a very small percentage of people that have had the new system and don't like it.

    Is it perfect? No but neither is a chain. So if you haven't had one or hadn't had experience with one then maybe you really shouldn't comment on it no matter what guru or who's friend's uncle's brother's coworker's bike mechanic said.

    Mine goes through some of the worst conditions possible 50+ miles a week for 6 months now with zero issues. Not one squeak, slip, etc. My trails are always wet, muddy sandy, rocky, etc and I have hit a few rocks and logs with it too. Anyone who has ridden Pisgah or anywhere else in Western NC can vouch for that. So far, it gives me a lot less grief than my chained bike.

    Also, Monogod has been around a while and has way more experience with Belts than me. I don't think he would have cut the frame of his Surly if the belt was purely a novelty.

    I still guess I probably should eventually buy a spare belt to have on hand for when this one does eventually break so I don't have any down time but I doubt I will carry it around with me.
    Just stick it in granny and start grinding.

  58. #58
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,191
    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy View Post
    Zero maintenance for 10,000 miles.
    Quote Originally Posted by Max24 View Post
    That's a pretty good reason over there.
    It's also complete BS... like about 95% of what he posts, unfortunately.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  59. #59
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,191
    Quote Originally Posted by jomissa View Post
    Why?
    Just because... something different, new and cool to play with and push the envelope.

    There's a reason you don't see belts on dirt bikes.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  60. #60
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy View Post
    Less efficient than a chain especially the newest incarnation. And not really debatable, since Gates admits this.
    from their website:

    At the core of the drive is the CenterTrack belt. Custom made, this 11-mm pitch, carbon-fiber belt is stronger than and as efficient as a traditional bike chain.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  61. #61
    4 Niners
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,124
    That is from marketing, they rounded up. I read an interview with the engineer (a woman by the way) who admits it is less efficient.
    Full rigid SS, Hardtail SS, Hardtail Geared, Full Suspension Geared.

  62. #62
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,191
    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy View Post
    And not really debatable, since Gates admits this.
    where?
    Quote Originally Posted by monogod View Post
    from their website:

    At the core of the drive is the CenterTrack belt. Custom made, this 11-mm pitch, carbon-fiber belt is stronger than and as efficient as a traditional bike chain.
    He just makes things up. I think some call it pathological.
    Nice avatar, btw.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  63. #63
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,191
    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy View Post
    Do all the Harley Davidson riders carry an extra belt?
    Is there a single off-road motorcycle that uses a belt drive?
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  64. #64
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy View Post
    That is from marketing, they rounded up. I read an interview with the engineer (a woman by the way) who admits it is less efficient.
    produce it.

    more propaganda from gates' website of lies:

    Repeated testing has found new belt drives equally efficient to new chain drives, including a third party test evaluating the Carbon Drive system on a bicycle.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jkidd_39's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    988
    Monogod, thanks for the pics. Great idea to use that spot to cut.

    And to this huge sh!tshow of a thread.. a Harley or any cruiser belt drive system vs. a Gates system is a gigantic apples vs. oranges comparison. And if you don't see that then please do not post in this thread.. cuz your retarded..

    Those systems have a tensioning system that could crush your hand.. ohh and it's a floating system so it will grow and move.. The Gates system is nothing of the sort.

    I think we have already established that the gates system is pretty much a niche type system that will reward someone with mechanical know how or at least will invest the time to screw with it enough to get it right..

    Does the efficiency of the gates vs. traditional chain really make or break the one guy on this thread looking to get one? Nope.. they will buy it or they won't.. but no one will be swayed by 4%. and If they are they are prob a jackass anyways.

    If you wanted to compare a belt drive system prevalent in the market then you would look at the clutch drive system the RZRs use. And the reason they use them is you can shred the belt instead of eating clutches.. This is still an apples to oranges comparo but it's closer than a motorcycle system.. The main advantages of the belt drive on motorcycles is the reduction in noise and smoothness of a belt system.. added plus of not chain growth.. which is pretty much a non issue on 99% of crusiers cuz most guys put almost no miles on either system.. if your stretching chains on a moto your prob at a track eating miles like no other or you are being some sort of tool and abusing the bike..

    That 1% I spoke of prob eat serious highway but to stretch a moto chain takes a long time..

    and besides crusiers are for the homosexuals or mid-life crisis folks..

    let the games begin...

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation: theMeat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by jkidd_39 View Post
    If you wanted to compare a belt drive system prevalent in the market then you would look at the clutch drive system the RZRs use. And the reason they use them is you can shred the belt instead of eating clutches..
    If they could engineer/figure a way to make a clutch like this (cvt) work imo it would be freakin awesome. This type clutch puts the load where the max rpm/output is automatically/by design which is an obviously good thing. But the output of an engine is constant/predictable, where a riders energy varies. And the weights and springs take energy to work, and that energy would only be coming from the rider. As well as the sheaths of the clutch contact the sides of the belt for contact, unlike the groves and gears on the bicycle systems of topic, which makes dirt/dust/slippage much more of an issue too.
    Round and round we go

  67. #67
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,191
    snatched from the misplaced response that polluted the tubeless brew thread:
    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy View Post
    Ok, so JH found that chain drive was 98.6 percent efficient. So instead of me saying that a chain drive is 98% efficient, I should now round that to 99 % efficient? I will update my spiel.
    What you claimed as the efficiency of the chain is not the issue.

    I'm curious why you ignored the fact that measured efficiency ranged from 81% to 98.6%, only referenced the highest value recorded, and now present that as if all chain drives are that efficient.

    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy View Post
    Typical error from someone that has never ridden a bike and is a researcher.
    Error? By your judgement? lol
    It's actually a pretty typical selection from someone actually employing the scientific method to try and control variables so that their results mean something. Jason Smith uses the same methodology, not surprisingly.
    Your "butt dyno" is meaningless.
    Oh, and Spicer rides bikes.
    btw: here's Smith's set-up:

    and here is Spicer's:

    It is ridiculous to attack the research that you disagree with by saying it is not real-world and then turn around and cite bench tests from someone else who uses a nearly identical set-up.
    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy View Post
    So the CyclingNews experiment that is about a year old with the current technology says that a chain with no tension is almost 100% efficient (maybe they meant 98.6) and a 15 year old study (the JH study was done in 1999) that was done before cellphones were invented with all new parts and probably eliminated bearing efficiency says that increasing tension is more efficient.
    Cell phones are definitely relevant.
    Smith's results do not show what you claim (surprise).
    I realize that pointing out the pervasive and blatant disregard for facts in your posts is like pissing in the wind, so I'm not going to engage that.
    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy View Post
    Also, you site a study that says that increasing tension is more efficient for chains and the question is whether more tension is more efficient for belts.
    I just pointed out that the Cycling News article contradicted some peer-reviewed scientific work on a similar topic... you're the one who delved into the article in an attempt to confuse the issue evade the question about where your "Gates admits 93%, it's not debatable" came from.
    I'll point out that the scientist you like reported a 1W difference between a typical chain and the Gates drive.
    At the constant 250W loads he uses that's an efficiency difference of 0.4%.

    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy View Post
    That is not the point of this thread.
    I know it's not. You took it there.
    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy View Post
    I complimented you for contributing, but you are again resorting to your normal obfuscation/confusion/BS/take them off the topic spiel.
    lol
    pot, meet kettle.

    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy View Post
    you somehow come here to dominate not just me, but many of the posters.
    I come here to learn and contribute like most people. When posters like you spew blatant misinformation it is detrimental to the community. People might actually believe some of the stuff you say.
    Quote Originally Posted by yourdaguy View Post
    If someone posts something that is not in conjunction with what you know, instead of telling the internet that they are an idiot (in so many words); just post what you think is the correct information
    That's mainly what I do.
    You are probably the most prolific repeat poster of misinformation I've seen across an incredible range of topics and you post a lot in the forums I read, which is why we cross paths.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by theMeat View Post
    If they could engineer/figure a way to make a clutch like this (cvt) work imo it would be freakin awesome. This type clutch puts the load where the max rpm/output is automatically/by design which is an obviously good thing. But the output of an engine is constant/predictable, where a riders energy varies. And the weights and springs take energy to work, and that energy would only be coming from the rider. As well as the sheaths of the clutch contact the sides of the belt for contact, unlike the groves and gears on the bicycle systems of topic, which makes dirt/dust/slippage much more of an issue too.
    I think that it would be tough to make it work right at the very low RPM of a cyclist. The gear ratios are determined by the centrifugal force on the pulleys. Moreover, even if you could make it work, you'd be losing a lot of efficiency in friction between the sides of the belt and pulley.

    That said, it would be probably be quite marketable just because of the sheer awesomeness.
    '12 Santa Cruz Superlight 29 | '12 Santa Cruz Butcher | '06 Specialized Allez Comp | '81 Schwinn Converted Fixie

  69. #69
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by theMeat View Post
    If they could engineer/figure a way to make a clutch like this (cvt) work imo it would be freakin awesome. This type clutch puts the load where the max rpm/output is automatically/by design which is an obviously good thing. But the output of an engine is constant/predictable, where a riders energy varies. And the weights and springs take energy to work, and that energy would only be coming from the rider. As well as the sheaths of the clutch contact the sides of the belt for contact, unlike the groves and gears on the bicycle systems of topic, which makes dirt/dust/slippage much more of an issue too.
    a cvt for bicycles has been available since 2007 (nuvinci) and gates makes a cog for them. the new n360 is a vast improvement on the original, just as the cdx is over the cdc.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: theMeat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by monogod View Post
    a cvt for bicycles has been available since 2007 (nuvinci) and gates makes a cog for them. the new n360 is a vast improvement on the original, just as the cdx is over the cdc.
    Call it what you want but that's nothing like the clutch Jkid, Ghost and I were referring to, but it looks promising.
    Round and round we go

  71. #71
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by theMeat View Post
    Call it what you want but that's nothing like the clutch Jkid, Ghost and I were referring to, but it looks promising.
    in over your head again, meat, as i said nothing of the sort. although they are both continuously variable transmissions at no time did i state, imply, nor could anyone with even moderate reading comprehension infer that i was drawing a similarity between the functional design of either the operation or "shifting" of the two CVTs.

    what i said is simply that a CVT has been available for bicycles since 2007 (nuvinci) and that gates made a cog for it. in other words, a belt-driven CVT has been available on bicycles for quite a while and both components were superior to their predecessors. nothing more, nothing less.

    so in your haste to be argumentative and confrontational you errantly inferred that which was neither said nor implied.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation: theMeat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by monogod View Post
    in over your head again, meat, as i said nothing of the sort. although they are both continuously variable transmissions at no time did i state, imply, nor could anyone with even moderate reading comprehension infer that i was drawing a similarity between the functional design of either the operation or "shifting" of the two CVTs.

    what i said is simply that a CVT has been available for bicycles since 2007 (nuvinci) and that gates made a cog for it. in other words, a belt-driven CVT has been available on bicycles for quite a while and both components were superior to their predecessors. nothing more, nothing less.

    so in your haste to be argumentative and confrontational you errantly inferred that which was neither said nor implied.
    Say what? I even said it looks promising and I'm hastefully confrontational?
    When it comes to the cvt that was being discussed i'm not in over my head with many, and i'm also not ashamed to admit i don't know something (hint). Like I don't know squat about bicycle belt drives, except for the fact that everyone i know that's tried it has gone back to a chain. Albiet none of them were as smart as you think you are lol. As well i think it's cool that people try to experiment with new tech, whether it's an attempt to be a show stopper or not. And i also think it's cool of you to share your experience with this, whether or not it's another look at how smart and cool I am attempt on your part. It's not surprising that you're the expert and absolute authority on everyfreakinthing that comes up, no matter how unrelated, and that you buddy around with everyone who bows to or agrees with you, and turn righteous troll psycho on everyone who doesn't. Except of coarse the mods which you kiss up to. Sorry if it's surprising to you that people can figure this out.
    Wish you could stay OT for once but go ahead, say whatever you want, it changes nothing, that's the way it is with you. If it makes you feel better to let you think you're one up on me by having the last word on any thread we're on that's fine. Even if the truth is I let you have the last word because i know you must and I just want you to stfu. Now, to leave this on a positive note, like i thought i did with the previous post, it's appropriate to say that many find you entertaining, and your grammar is excellent.
    Round and round we go

  73. #73
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by theMeat View Post
    Say what? I even said it looks promising and I'm hastefully confrontational?
    When it comes to the cvt that was being discussed i'm not in over my head with many, and i'm also not ashamed to admit i don't know something (hint). Like I don't know squat about bicycle belt drives, except for the fact that everyone i know that's tried it has gone back to a chain. Albiet none of them were as smart as you think you are lol. As well i think it's cool that people try to experiment with new tech, whether it's an attempt to be a show stopper or not. And i also think it's cool of you to share your experience with this, whether or not it's another look at how smart and cool I am attempt on your part. It's not surprising that you're the expert and absolute authority on everyfreakinthing that comes up, no matter how unrelated, and that you buddy around with everyone who bows to or agrees with you, and turn righteous troll psycho on everyone who doesn't. Except of coarse the mods which you kiss up to. Sorry if it's surprising to you that people can figure this out.
    Wish you could stay OT for once but go ahead, say whatever you want, it changes nothing, that's the way it is with you. If it makes you feel better to let you think you're one up on me by having the last word on any thread we're on that's fine. Even if the truth is I let you have the last word because i know you must and I just want you to stfu. Now, to leave this on a positive note, like i thought i did with the previous post, it's appropriate to say that many find you entertaining, and your grammar is excellent.
    wow.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  74. #74
    Saving lives with knives.
    Reputation: frank daleview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    939
    It would seem to me that of all the "problem" places to attack on current bike design, the chain is a pretty poor place start. The chain can easily be repaired or modified to suit the needs of it's user, it is efficient enough that any gains would be irrelevant, and it is not particularly heavy.

    Now, since these are used on single speeds... I would be very interested in chain tensioner that worked without creaking or requiring constant adjustment...
    Formerly known as iceaxe

  75. #75
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by frank daleview View Post
    It would seem to me that of all the "problem" places to attack on current bike design, the chain is a pretty poor place start. The chain can easily be repaired or modified to suit the needs of it's user, it is efficient enough that any gains would be irrelevant, and it is not particularly heavy.
    curious about a couple things... where'd you get the impression the impetus of the belt was to attack the "problem" of the chain? have you ever ridden a belt drive?

    discounting the below, what do you see as problem places of current bike design and which would you rectify first?

    Quote Originally Posted by frank daleview
    Now, since these are used on single speeds... I would be very interested in chain tensioner that worked without creaking or requiring constant adjustment...
    wish granted!

    just a few:

    • niner biocentric 2
    • spot's kobe sliders
    • carver's sliders
    • carver's delron wedge ebb
    • philcentric ebb
    • WI eno eccentric hub
    • good old fashioned track ends
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  76. #76
    Saving lives with knives.
    Reputation: frank daleview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    939
    Actually, I have ridden a belt drive, it's quiet, and smooth. There seemed to be an awful lot of tension on the belt. Other than that I really didn't perceive any other differences, granted I never took these on a trail or rode it very hard. I imagine they won't stain your fancy linen pants or while riding--I would get one for a city cruiser.

    I think it is a very reasonable assumption that the impetus for belt drive development was to overcome some of the shortcomings of chain drive for certain applications... or are you suggesting it was designed purely as a novelty?

    With respect chain tensioning:

    I am currently on my second air 9 carbon frame utilizing the Biocentric 2 and thus far I am unimpressed, yes it stays put, unlike my friends Gary fisher with sliders that constantly slip, however it constantly creaks and pops. Unfortunately the ENO is not recommended for most carbon frames. The others I have not had the opportunity to try. I am very interested in the system on the new Ibis 29er.
    Formerly known as iceaxe

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    73
    I ran belt drive for about year and a half. Worked fine I ran a bashquard with the belt drive so I didn't have a belt problems.

    One thing I didn't like is the amount a tension required for the belt drive. I think it affects bearing wear in the rear and in the bottom bracket bearings. Also it would squeak in the right dry dusty conditions. Believe there is a little more resistance then a chain also. Anyway I went back to chain, easier to switch ratios, and cheaper.

  78. #78
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by quicksilverta View Post
    I ran belt drive for about year and a half. Worked fine I ran a bashquard with the belt drive so I didn't have a belt problems.

    One thing I didn't like is the amount a tension required for the belt drive. I think it affects bearing wear in the rear and in the bottom bracket bearings. Also it would squeak in the right dry dusty conditions. Believe there is a little more resistance then a chain also. Anyway I went back to chain, easier to switch ratios, and cheaper.
    the original CDC system required a lot of tension to operate properly, and was detrimental to both bb and hub bearings. the current CDX system requires MUCH less tension, and is superior to the original CDC in many other ways as well - including being as efficient as a chain (which the CDC system was not).
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    73
    Yep I have the new CDX system. I disagree, I used the iphone app to set the tension to gates recommended tension. Set it around 75 Hz. Checked with a iphone5 and a iphone4s.

  80. #80
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    that's the problem. setting the belt with the iphone compared to the gate's krikit has routinely resulted in much higher tension, sometimes as much as 40 lbs too much.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    73


    Looks like it works fine....

  82. #82
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    fwiw, i wasn't sharing his experience or commenting on an interweb vid clip, i was sharing my experience using both back to back in nearly a score of instances. in every case using the app resulted in both higher and inconsistent tension vs the krikit. we also tried using a straight frequency analyzer on an android with similar results.

    imho everyone running a belt drive should own a krikit just as everyone running a chain drive should own a chain tool.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    73
    Thanks for the info, sounds like gates should pull the app and stop telling people to use it.

  84. #84
    Rogue Exterminator
    Reputation: kjlued's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,951
    I fail to see how anyone would think an app on a cell phone would have any value in properly setting the belt tension. I would much rather use the German method of gutenuf.
    Just stick it in granny and start grinding.

  85. #85
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by frank daleview View Post
    Actually, I have ridden a belt drive, it's quiet, and smooth. There seemed to be an awful lot of tension on the belt. Other than that I really didn't perceive any other differences, granted I never took these on a trail or rode it very hard. I imagine they won't stain your fancy linen pants or while riding--I would get one for a city cruiser.

    I think it is a very reasonable assumption that the impetus for belt drive development was to overcome some of the shortcomings of chain drive for certain applications... or are you suggesting it was designed purely as a novelty?
    no, i was suggesting that despite being room for improvement in certain applications that the chain is not an intrinsic problem area lagging behind in development that needed to be addressed. i would also suggest there is a difference in refining a final drive system verses it inherently being one of the ""problem" places to attack on current bike design". all other areas of the bike from suspension, ders/shifters, component materials, and even shift cables are constantly being refined - INCLUDING chains. look at the new 10 and 11 speed stuff.

    it would also seem, as another poster pointed out, that most of the people railing against it haven't actually ridden it for any length of time either on or off road. your admission being case in point. and i'm not sure which system you used, CDC or CDX, or if it was properly set up but a properly set up CDX system doesn't require excessive tension.

    i will wholeheartedly agree with you that one application where a belt drive really shines is in urban commuter scenarios - particularly when riding in mucky weather. but since my fancy linen pants are black it really doesn't matter if they happen to get a little grease on them or not.

    Quote Originally Posted by daleview
    With respect chain tensioning:

    I am currently on my second air 9 carbon frame utilizing the Biocentric 2 and thus far I am unimpressed, yes it stays put, unlike my friends Gary fisher with sliders that constantly slip, however it constantly creaks and pops. Unfortunately the ENO is not recommended for most carbon frames. The others I have not had the opportunity to try. I am very interested in the system on the new Ibis 29er.
    i was just sharing tension methods that i have personally found to be both solid and squeak free. ENO eccentric can be used on a carbon frame provided it doesn't have a carbon dropout. i ran one on a first-gen superfly for a while. and notice i was very specific in which sliders i referenced. despite being of similar design it's odd that some mfg's sliders grip and are quiet while some are not.

    the tranny's tensioning system is intriguing indeed, and i'm keeping my eye on it too. would like to get one in my hands to fiddle with.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Zerort's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    815
    To revive a dead thread - the tension system on the IBIS Tranny doesn't even need to be used if you run certain ratios and belt length.

    For instance, I am currently running a 42 x 24 with a 113T belt and the chain stays are in their shortest setting against the frame. This is also true with a 46 x 24 with a 115T belt if I recall correctly but that did have a bit more tension on the belt that I was comfortable with and the gearing was wrong for what I ride.

    One other thing I like about the belt is that it is a bit lighter.
    by Silentfoe
    I'm satisfied knowing that what I wear during my "day" job makes me more of a man than you'll ever be.

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by Zerort View Post
    To revive a dead thread - the tension system on the IBIS Tranny doesn't even need to be used if you run certain ratios and belt length.

    For instance, I am currently running a 42 x 24 with a 113T belt and the chain stays are in their shortest setting against the frame. This is also true with a 46 x 24 with a 115T belt if I recall correctly but that did have a bit more tension on the belt that I was comfortable with and the gearing was wrong for what I ride.

    One other thing I like about the belt is that it is a bit lighter.
    What mountains are you riding that you can pull a 42/24 or a 46/24?

    I don't IBIS anymore but that must be a city bike. And maybe for city bikes this 'advancement' may be appropriate.

    I have only known two people in my life with a belt drive. One reverted to a chain and the other sold that belted bike.

    Now we have an internet debate, an iphone app for belt tension, a kit that supposedly works better to set tension, etc etc. All for a belt drive that, at best, is equal to the efficiency of a chain and at worst is a few degrees less efficient, but requires less maintenance, but a different sort of frame, the addition of some sort of tensioner, and is not field repairable nor is it easy to change gear ratios.

    Not to mention I can walk to any one of the 4 bikes shops in town here and buy a SRAM, Shimano, and in one of them, a Campagnolo chain.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Zerort's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    815
    Quote Originally Posted by Schlug View Post
    What mountains are you riding that you can pull a 42/24 or a 46/24?
    Mountains? I live in Michigan.

    Not a commuter bike.
    by Silentfoe
    I'm satisfied knowing that what I wear during my "day" job makes me more of a man than you'll ever be.

Similar Threads

  1. belt drive
    By JUNGLEKID5 in forum Singlespeed
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-14-2013, 04:30 PM
  2. Belt drive?
    By slopok in forum Singlespeed
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-08-2013, 07:46 PM
  3. Belt Drive
    By Graham77 in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 03-06-2013, 08:21 AM
  4. MTB Belt Drive CVT..........Please?
    By NEPMTBA in forum Drivetrain - shifters, derailleurs, cranks
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-05-2012, 12:28 PM
  5. I'm DONE with Belt Drive!
    By drMP in forum Singlespeed
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: 04-30-2011, 10:29 PM

Members who have read this thread: 1

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •