Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 55

Thread: New Belt Drive

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,074

    New Belt Drive

    This may solve a few problems with belt drive

    It looks like it will get round the need for ultrastiff chainstays for one thing.

    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    809
    Umm...I don't know. Looks to me like the belt needs to be even more perfectly aligned between the pulleys, meaning even a little bit of flex and the ridge wont fit into that groove.

  3. #3
    .......
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,707
    I don't understand how dirt, grime and mud will simplly just "fall away." Seems like it will just be packed in and compacted over and over until the belt finally falls off or the crank stops moving.

  4. #4
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,335
    Quote Originally Posted by p nut
    I don't understand how dirt, grime and mud will simplly just "fall away." Seems like it will just be packed in and compacted over and over until the belt finally falls off or the crank stops moving.
    Really? I'm not exactly the world's biggest cheerleader for the current / old Gates belt drive but this looks like an improvement to me. Looks like mud will be pushed out below the belt... onto the beltring where it will fall harmlessly away.

    This is not to imply that mud is / was the biggest problem with the current Gates belt / beltring design.

    I guess time will tell. In any case I'm personally glad to see Gates working toward improvment of the belt system.

    --sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org
    Remember who
    you wanted to be.

    Quote Originally Posted by riverrat
    Jaybo... quit *****ing and move to Texas

  5. #5
    Mtbr Forum Sponsor - Homebrewed Components
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,421
    i'm looking forward to trying this at the dirt demo next week.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    897
    Boy, it's really tough to beat a chain.

    Mojo

  7. #7
    .......
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,707
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus
    Really? I'm not exactly the world's biggest cheerleader for the current / old Gates belt drive but this looks like an improvement to me. Looks like mud will be pushed out below the belt... onto the beltring where it will fall harmlessly away.

    This is not to imply that mud is / was the biggest problem with the current Gates belt / beltring design.

    I guess time will tell. In any case I'm personally glad to see Gates working toward improvment of the belt system.

    --sParty
    Yeah, definitely and improvement, but I was looking at that center spline down the belt/ring, which could fill up with mud/debris, especially if it cakes on and dries. Maybe its not an issue and I'm being overly pessimistic.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,074
    I can see the reason for thinking that, but it would be no worse than a chain in the same circumstances IMO.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  9. #9
    Mtbr Forum Sponsor - Homebrewed Components
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike
    I can see the reason for thinking that, but it would be no worse than a chain in the same circumstances IMO.
    except for the fact that a chain has a place for the mud to go completely through, whereas the belt does not.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,074
    I used to ride my belt driven motorbike through deep mud in Oz. The mud just got squooshed out. The only problem was when I let it dry overnight and that would have been an equal problem with a chain.

    It will be interesting to see how this belt copes.

    Schlumpf have a different approach to this.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  11. #11
    L09erdr
    Guest
    Nice.. if only that option was more affordable...

  12. #12
    Mtbr Forum Sponsor - Homebrewed Components
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,421
    Quote Originally Posted by L09erdr
    Nice.. if only that option was more affordable...
    There's nothing wrong with the price, it's just that the economy has to adjust itself around it.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bryan_d's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    457
    Quote Originally Posted by Mojo Man
    Boy, it's really tough to beat a chain.

    Mojo
    Hahahaha. The chain is surely beat, the system on the other hand... eh, not so much.

    Looking forward to the advancement though.

    Bryan d
    Just keep pedaling, don't stop pedaling.

  14. #14
    .......
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,707
    Well, somebody in the Pac NW needs to test this thing out thoroughly and report back.

  15. #15
    L09erdr
    Guest

    Listen!

    Let me guess $100 + for the belt alone? I mean you can buy a replacement ATV, Motorcycle, snowmobile etc.. belt for cheaper? lol... But hey coming from Gates what do you expect. I mean compare that to a $15 chain. Then you have the front belt drive sprocket coming in at $130+ just for a sprocket. Chain drive sprocket maybe $40 at most? Deff a price concern and possibly a lesson to be learned here. Cool product some may be gullible enough to bite but weigh your options people!
    Last edited by L09erdr; 09-18-2010 at 04:16 AM.

  16. #16
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,210
    Solves the belt wander problem, perhaps. I see more contact area with the belt, meaning more friction, (especially when dirty), and this can not be great in terms of efficiency.

    That said, if it keeps the belt on, it's better and for belt drive fans, now all you have to worry about is ratcheting.

    And cog size availability

    and if it the bigger chain wheel fits your frame

    and if you can afford it.....

    Chains. Still simple. Still cheap. Still working around the world on millions of bicycles.


    I'm still not convinced folks.
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  17. #17
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,335
    Quote Originally Posted by Guitar Ted
    ...
    I'm still not convinced folks.
    I'm not either, Ted, but the cool thing is we get to stand on the sidelines while the players spend their dough & get beat up as forward motion progresses.

    Once (if?) all the bugs get worked out, and the price is right, I'm there.

    Until then, I see the belt as a solution looking for a problem.

    --sParty

    P.S. I rode my {chain driven} Vulture SS 57 miles today in a race. It was totally quiet. I paid special attention to how much noise it didn't make because I've heard several belt users say one of the aspects they like about the belt is it's silent. Well, the chain on my SS is silent, too. Just sayin'.

    P.P.S. The King hub... THAT'S noisy. But the same hub on my buddy's belt bike is just as noisy as mine.
    disciplesofdirt.org
    Remember who
    you wanted to be.

    Quote Originally Posted by riverrat
    Jaybo... quit *****ing and move to Texas

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,074
    Sparty: the chain on my bike was "silent" too but when I put on a belt drive I realised the chain was not silent.

    G_T: a good quality chain is not cheap, but it is much cheaper than a belt. However you don't have to oil a belt, and the cost of good quality chain lube is not cheap over a year or 2.

    Chains are superior in efficiency if we run them in ideal conditions, ie clean and lubricated. These exist for the first few seconds of any ride I do.

    I would prefer a chain if I could get a properly designed oil bath chaincase for my bike, but anything out there at the moment is clunky and heavy, and there is no availability of mtb cranks and rear hubs etc that are designed to run with a chaincase.

    Of course you're both right. This is early days for belt drive. I'm just doing it because I like to experiment, and I'm a proponent of "as little bike as possible".

    The most important reason not to embrace belt drive at the moment is one I haven't heard on any forum. Proprietary parts.

    Gates has a monopoly on a belt drive system that works right now. For example, innovative people like ISAR can't just knock up sprockets without permission. More different cog sizes and offsets would mean more chances of fitting to different bikes.

    This means it is highly likely to become an evolutionary dead end like almost every other closed source product in cycling before it. Gates would benefit from open-sourcing the cog design and making their money out of selling the belts.

    I'm interested that Schlumpf have gone for the 14mm belt - is that a non proprietary size?
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  19. #19
    Single Speed Junkie
    Reputation: crux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,108
    Quote Originally Posted by Mojo Man
    Boy, it's really tough to beat a chain.

    Mojo
    2nd.

    A friend of mine paid top dollar for converting his old Yeti over to the belt drive and it worked for a short period of time. After a few rides it started squeaking and making tons of noise. He has called Gates/Spot frequently searching for a solution. They keep telling him that the spacing is off, just put another spacer in it and it will be fine.

    Well last night he finally got sick of it so he brought it over for some trouble shooting. After a few hours going thru the bike the weak link are the pulleys and belt. The teeth of the pulleys are quite pitted from little rocks that got more pushed into the drive train than out. The belt is showing equal signs of what I'd call advanced aging. Might also be that the parts ha has were original samples. It was pretty clear that he received sample parts by the writing on the top of the belt.

    The bike still squeaks. Honestly my chain has proven significantly more reliable that the belt. As an added bonus when I want to change gearing it does not cost me an arm and a leg. Think the belt drive has a long way to go both in terms of technology and customer service for it to gain wide spread appeal.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Climber999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    720
    The limited pulley selection make the belt system a 'no-go' for me.
    Even for a city commuter, for which a belt is ideal, I cannot calibrate the gear inch ratio to 70 +-.
    Last edited by Climber999; 09-19-2010 at 09:53 AM.

  21. #21
    Mtbr Forum Sponsor - Homebrewed Components
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike
    Sparty: the chain on my bike was "silent" too but when I put on a belt drive I realised the chain was not silent.

    G_T: a good quality chain is not cheap, but it is much cheaper than a belt. However you don't have to oil a belt, and the cost of good quality chain lube is not cheap over a year or 2.

    Chains are superior in efficiency if we run them in ideal conditions, ie clean and lubricated. These exist for the first few seconds of any ride I do.

    I would prefer a chain if I could get a properly designed oil bath chaincase for my bike, but anything out there at the moment is clunky and heavy, and there is no availability of mtb cranks and rear hubs etc that are designed to run with a chaincase.

    Of course you're both right. This is early days for belt drive. I'm just doing it because I like to experiment, and I'm a proponent of "as little bike as possible".

    The most important reason not to embrace belt drive at the moment is one I haven't heard on any forum. Proprietary parts.

    Gates has a monopoly on a belt drive system that works right now. For example, innovative people like ISAR can't just knock up sprockets without permission. More different cog sizes and offsets would mean more chances of fitting to different bikes.

    This means it is highly likely to become an evolutionary dead end like almost every other closed source product in cycling before it. Gates would benefit from open-sourcing the cog design and making their money out of selling the belts.

    I'm interested that Schlumpf have gone for the 14mm belt - is that a non proprietary size?
    "silent" is good enough for me. I dont need the stress that comes with a belt drive system just to get rid of a noise that i never hear.

    i dont know what you're doing to your chains, but i just run a cheapo $25-30 chain and i use rock n road gold lube. I might go through 2 bottles a year, if i'm wasteful.

    Also, if belt drive is so much better, how come sportbikes dont use them over chains? There are plenty of motorcycles that do use belts, but all the high performance ones still use chains. If there was some advantage to a belt drive, i think the AMA or MOTOGP guys would have adopted it by now. Same with motorcross.

  22. #22
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,335
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike
    ...
    Chains are superior in efficiency if we run them in ideal conditions, ie clean and lubricated. These exist for the first few seconds of any ride I do. ...
    I could be wrong, but I believe that chains retain their superior efficiency far longer than a few seconds.

    --sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org
    Remember who
    you wanted to be.

    Quote Originally Posted by riverrat
    Jaybo... quit *****ing and move to Texas

  23. #23
    Teen Wolf
    Reputation: cr45h's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    887
    not convinced, never will be.

    chains are tried and true AND CHEAP, oh and they work great.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,074
    Quote Originally Posted by cr45h
    not convinced, never will be.

    chains are tried and true AND CHEAP, oh and they work great.
    I'm not trying to sell you a belt and don't care if you stay with chains. They work pretty well after all.

    All I want is a simple transmission that doesn't smear grease and oil on you if you touch it, and if it's lighter, that's a bonus. So far belt is the only workable option, although I'm also experimenting with direct drive.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Climber999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    720
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike
    I'm not trying to sell you a belt and don't care if you stay with chains. They work pretty well after all.

    All I want is a simple transmission that doesn't smear grease and oil on you if you touch it, and if it's lighter, that's a bonus. So far belt is the only workable option, although I'm also experimenting with direct drive.
    Greasless and dry is the only thing going for a belt drive. In terms of weight, the difference is about 60g. Not overwhelmingly significant in my book. See of a weight related discussion here: http://waltworks.blogspot.com/2008/0...-thoughts.html

    IMO, the limited selection of gear ratios, tendency to skip under high torque,creaking and squeezing when mucked and high cost should keep mountain biker away from it.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,074
    The weight difference is greater. Photos are the chain drive components I removed and the belt drive components I replaced them with.


    Chain and sprockets weigh 464 gms


    Belt and sprockets weigh 254 gms

    Agree about cost and the limited choice of ratios, but I get one that suits me for SS, so that isn't a major problem. (I don't change my gearing once I have a ratio that suits)

    My belts don't display any of the negative points you claim. If they did, I'd sort it or not use the belt.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  27. #27
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,335
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike
    The weight difference is greater. Photos are the chain drive components I removed and the belt drive components I replaced them with.


    Chain and sprockets weigh 464 gms


    Belt and sprockets weigh 254 gms

    Agree about cost and the limited choice of ratios, but I get one that suits me for SS, so that isn't a major problem. (I don't change my gearing once I have a ratio that suits)

    My belts don't display any of the negative points you claim. If they did, I'd sort it or not use the belt.
    Yeahbutt... you also weighed a plastic bag with the chain & cog & ring... no fair.

    --sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org
    Remember who
    you wanted to be.

    Quote Originally Posted by riverrat
    Jaybo... quit *****ing and move to Texas

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,074
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus
    Yeahbutt... you also weighed a plastic bag with the chain & cog & ring... no fair.
    Darn, sprung
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  29. #29
    Mtbr Forum Sponsor - Homebrewed Components
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,421
    yea, and it's also a stainless surly ring, probably the heaviest around. the difference between belt drive and a decent cog, chain, and chainring isnt nearly that much. Maybe 60g at most.

    This guy should really run for office.

  30. #30
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,335
    Quote Originally Posted by ISuckAtRiding
    yea, and it's also a stainless surly ring, probably the heaviest around. the difference between belt drive and a decent cog, chain, and chainring isnt nearly that much. Maybe 60g at most.
    ...
    Good point, that. I suppose the only fair comparison would be to spend the same amount of cash on ring, cog & chain as was spent on the Gates stuff and then do the weight comparison. This might get a fella some ti hardware but in any case at least some lighter gear than Surly.

    Quote Originally Posted by ISuckAtRiding
    ...
    This guy should really run for office.
    Velobike certainly has a knack for presenting his arguments in a compelling way. And his tenacity is admirable. I assume your statement is offered in a positive vein... in which case I most certainly agree. I'd vote for him. Uh, I think...

    --sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org
    Remember who
    you wanted to be.

    Quote Originally Posted by riverrat
    Jaybo... quit *****ing and move to Texas

  31. #31
    Mtbr Forum Sponsor - Homebrewed Components
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus
    Good point, that. I suppose the only fair comparison would be to spend the same amount of cash on ring, cog & chain as was spent on the Gates stuff and then do the weight comparison. This might get a fella some ti hardware but in any case at least some lighter gear than Surly.


    --sParty
    or you could save your money and just buy an aluminum chainring and cog. That would be about 50-60g total for both items. I guess one could say aluminum cogs wear fast, but i would venture to guess they'd outlast a belt for the majority of people, and i think they're still cheaper than a belt (for both the cog and chainring together).

  32. #32
    Mtbr Forum Sponsor - Homebrewed Components
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus

    Velobike certainly has a knack for presenting his arguments in a compelling way. And his tenacity is admirable. I assume your statement is offered in a positive vein... in which case I most certainly agree. I'd vote for him. Uh, I think...

    --sParty
    As much as i enjoy giving him a hard time about the belt drive , i certainly don't mean any offense to him. Even though i have seen him occasionally grasping for straws, i admire how he always seems to keep his composure.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,074
    The weight was what was taken off my bike so it's a real life comparison, not a weight weenie competition.

    I have given up on alloy chainrings because they don't seem to like granite dust and mud - ie they don't last long in it. The only alloy one I have found with any sort of life in those conditions is the Middleburn Uno with the hard coating.

    If I liked disposable parts, I'd run a derailleur.

    I can't comment about the life of the belt cog yet - there doesn't seem to be any wear, but I'll have a better idea after January when I do my usual run in the StrathPuffer 24 hour. (Don't worry I'll have a backup belt and spare bike* with chain in the pits, not to mention a bale of straws to clutch to justify my performance )

    *This could be a good opportunity to do a back to back test. The 'Puffer in 24 hours does more damage to bikes and components than a year's racing. I could run belt for 12 hours and chain for 12 hours (I could even use the alloy Middleburn cog I got from ISAR as the comparison), but that all depends on how much snow we get because I'm hoping to be racing a fatbike on snow instead of my 29er on ice and mud.

    Hey, and I don't mind you guys disagreeing with me, you may be right after all, but for me the end isn't until I have drawn my own conclusions by doing my own testing. I have been known to do a 24 hour race on drum brakes to see how they lasted in mud (quite well actually).
    Last edited by Velobike; 09-19-2010 at 03:23 PM.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  34. #34
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,335
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike
    ... and spare bike* with chain ...
    Okay then, guess you'd better change your sig to "Two bikes... both as little as possible."

    --sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org
    Remember who
    you wanted to be.

    Quote Originally Posted by riverrat
    Jaybo... quit *****ing and move to Texas

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,074
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  36. #36
    one chain loop
    Reputation: fishcreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,346
    looked like cams of my compound bow
    everything sucks but my vacuum cleaner.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dixie whiskey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    335
    My buddy Tim has modified his Raleigh bike to belt drive (see thread here: Alfine ,belt drive, 29er project. It's been a long PITA process for him to get it to fit and to date he still has not gotten straight answers from various vendors on inconsistencies. Tim’s a tool & die maker, so his precision to detail supersedes any bike part manufacture (see the thread for problems he has with Gates cog ID was .010" too small among a few other things).

    One thing not mentioned here is belt flex which is what Tim is battling with now. I’ll forward this to him to elaborate further.

    I’m with Sparty, I rather sit back and watch and read about all the problems and let them work themselves out before jumping on the bandwagon. The safety (chained) bicycle has had a fairly successful run for 134 years; I doubt seriously anything is going to quickly phase it out.

  38. #38
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,335
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike
    Looks as promising as belt drive to me.

    --sParty

    P.S. Kidding.
    disciplesofdirt.org
    Remember who
    you wanted to be.

    Quote Originally Posted by riverrat
    Jaybo... quit *****ing and move to Texas

  39. #39
    Mtbr Forum Sponsor - Homebrewed Components
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike
    The weight was what was taken off my bike so it's a real life comparison, not a weight weenie competition.

    I have given up on alloy chainrings because they don't seem to like granite dust and mud - ie they don't last long in it. The only alloy one I have found with any sort of life in those conditions is the Middleburn Uno with the hard coating.

    If I liked disposable parts, I'd run a derailleur.

    I can't comment about the life of the belt cog yet - there doesn't seem to be any wear, but I'll have a better idea after January when I do my usual run in the StrathPuffer 24 hour. (Don't worry I'll have a backup belt and spare bike* with chain in the pits, not to mention a bale of straws to clutch to justify my performance )

    *This could be a good opportunity to do a back to back test. The 'Puffer in 24 hours does more damage to bikes and components than a year's racing. I could run belt for 12 hours and chain for 12 hours (I could even use the alloy Middleburn cog I got from ISAR as the comparison), but that all depends on how much snow we get because I'm hoping to be racing a fatbike on snow instead of my 29er on ice and mud.

    Hey, and I don't mind you guys disagreeing with me, you may be right after all, but for me the end isn't until I have drawn my own conclusions by doing my own testing. I have been known to do a 24 hour race on drum brakes to see how they lasted in mud (quite well actually).
    ok, then go with ti. It's probably in the same price range anyways, and it will last for a LONG time.

    And if you ride through all this crap, why are you worried about a messy chain getting a little grease on you? That's like getting your hand blown off, but all you're crying about is a hang nail.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,074
    Quote Originally Posted by ISuckAtRiding
    ok, then go with ti. It's probably in the same price range anyways, and it will last for a LONG time.

    And if you ride through all this crap, why are you worried about a messy chain getting a little grease on you? That's like getting your hand blown off, but all you're crying about is a hang nail.
    Some people don't mind being greasy, I do.

    Mud is fine - so long as it isn't mixed with dog eggs

    Fair enough comment about a Ti ring. Looks better too.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  41. #41
    Mtbr Forum Sponsor - Homebrewed Components
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike

    Mud is fine - so long as it isn't mixed with dog eggs
    hahaha i guess this is something we can both agree on.

    It's one of the good things about California, they make people pick up after their dogs, even on the trails.
    Now only if they would start doing that with horses.......

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,074
    Quote Originally Posted by dixie whiskey
    My buddy Tim has modified his Raleigh bike to belt drive...
    It's a really neat conversion, but didn't he chop a section out of the front of his chainstay to fit the front sprocket? It wouldn't have helped with chainstay flex.

    My experience with conversions is that they can work (except an elevated chainstay attempt), but you are taking the chance of failure using a bike that is not designed for a belt from the start.

    There's no excuse for belt problems in a bike from a manufacturer though - there's plenty of information on how to get it right. It will be interesting to see how well the production belt drive Raleigh works.

    Early days yet though, and no-one is forcing anyone kicking and screaming to ride with a belt.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,719
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike
    Woot! Hungarians represent!

    In fact, I even happen to be wearing a Schwinn Csepel t-shirt right now.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    488
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike
    It's a really neat conversion, but didn't he chop a section out of the front of his chainstay to fit the front sprocket? It wouldn't have helped with chainstay flex.

    My experience with conversions is that they can work (except an elevated chainstay attempt), but you are taking the chance of failure using a bike that is not designed for a belt from the start.

    There's no excuse for belt problems in a bike from a manufacturer though - there's plenty of information on how to get it right. It will be interesting to see how well the production belt drive Raleigh works.

    Early days yet though, and no-one is forcing anyone kicking and screaming to ride with a belt.

    Yep my conversion. One of the things that Gates does not mention any place is the belts do stretch like a chain. Before I even started I called Gates up with all my info on the stay length and the dude said I had 2mm to spare. Great went and did the conversion. But after a ride on a trail with some hills the darn thing started to pop so bad I thought the hub exploded. Tried to tighten the belt and no joy the EBB just did circles. So now I'm waiting on a 26 from Phil Wood as I can't get on a CNC mill at work due to work backing up. ( I can use the machines at work as long as no jobs are scheduled). I can't even test out if the foam worked even though I have noticed spreading the stay apart now is a stone cold b-tch. Before it would spread apart like a 20 dollar hooker.

    Tim

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,074
    Quote Originally Posted by TimT
    ...One of the things that Gates does not mention any place is the belts do stretch like a chain....
    ...I can't even test out if the foam worked even though I have noticed spreading the stay apart now is a stone cold b-tch...
    I haven't had belt stretch yet, but it's something I have considered. As far as I can see Gates claim the belts don't stretch. We all know not to believe everything that manufacturers claim

    Two possibilities occurred to me:
    Belt stretch akin to cable stretch - ie the belt doesn't actually stretch but appears to because of a change in dimension of the sprockets by wear. This coming winter will give me the chance to test this.
    Belt damage - riding up on the cogs must overstress the belt considerably. I haven't ridden any distance on a belt that does that, so I haven't got an example. It would be interesting to compare the length of a belt that has had that sort of use to an original.

    The foam idea is ingenious. I like to keep my modifications to stuff that can be done in a shed with handtools, so that really appeals. I'm going to steal that idea if I get a flexy chainstay on my next conversion.

    One stiffening method that could be done by the likes of yourself with access to machine tools is to convert the rear end to take a large axle (eg Maxle), although that would restrict the choice of hubs. I think this would give a much stiffer rear end and so the chainstay would have its load shared by its opposite number without materially changing the vertical compliance (if any) of the frame.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  46. #46
    SS or Die
    Reputation: -Muz R-'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    354
    The Belt on my frame failed as a result of frame flex to some degree but I must say that as it got older, it slipped more and more to the point that it wouldnt hold teeth even when climbing seated. All the teeth on my belt are still intact too so I ruled that out and I used the Gates Belt Tension tool through out my entire experience with it.

    It does seem possible that the belt in my case had infact stretch or deformed, other than general wear n tear I cant think of any other reason it would skip teeth more and more as time went on. What once started as failure under extreme load had progressed to an unreliable drive train under moderate pressure which really effected my riding enjoyment. I began hitting steep sections of trail like a sissy in fear of the dreaded KLACK only to be passed by some freak on a geared bike! Doh!

    For the sake of an extra 120 grams and $25 worth of lube per annum, Im happy enough with my Chain Drive for the mean time.....Shame really......I liked my Belt when it worked. I hope they continue to improve it until they get it sorted.
    "Be the Gear..."

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    488
    On the foam use the good stuff. The 16lbs stuff is very tough. You can hit it with a hammer tough. I'd love to have a bigger axle but with a IGH .........I need to find the old belt and compare it to the new one. I'm not giving up yet but I'm collecting parts for a chain drive. I just hate seeing the bike on the stand while I'm waiting on belt drive parts. Wish I had it on my trip last weekend could have used the gears and big wheels.

    Tim

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Climber999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    720
    Quote Originally Posted by -Muz R-
    The Belt on my frame failed as a result of frame flex to some degree but I must say that as it got older, it slipped more and more to the point that it wouldnt hold teeth even when climbing seated. All the teeth on my belt are still intact too so I ruled that out and I used the Gates Belt Tension tool through out my entire experience with it.

    It does seem possible that the belt in my case had infact stretch or deformed, other than general wear n tear I cant think of any other reason it would skip teeth more and more as time went on. What once started as failure under extreme load had progressed to an unreliable drive train under moderate pressure which really effected my riding enjoyment. I began hitting steep sections of trail like a sissy in fear of the dreaded KLACK only to be passed by some freak on a geared bike! Doh!

    For the sake of an extra 120 grams and $25 worth of lube per annum, Im happy enough with my Chain Drive for the mean time.....Shame really......I liked my Belt when it worked. I hope they continue to improve it until they get it sorted.
    BTW, when I considered a belt drive for my new bike and discussed it with James, he confided with me it skipped on him as well. I trust James to set up his belt drive well enough, so I can only surmise there is some inherent flaw to to the belt drive system as a whole (yes, stretching over time, when it is not supposed to, is a flaw in my book).

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,074
    Quote Originally Posted by TimT
    ..I need to find the old belt and compare it to the new one. I'm not giving up yet but I'm collecting parts for a chain drive...
    That will be interesting. I'd like to find out if stretch occurs on a belt that is never overstressed by riding up. Anyone know about this?

    Maybe the answer is to ride with a snubber in place. It certainly sorted out a really bad case of klaaking on my flexy conversion, but really the idea is to keep things simple rather than more complicated.

    There's no doubt the 100 odd years of chain evolution is a hard act to beat. Someone invent the lubefree chain please
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  50. #50
    .......
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,707
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike
    All I want is a simple transmission that doesn't smear grease and oil on you if you touch it....
    WTF??!!! Doesn't mtb encompass and embrace the dirt, grime, oil, and blood? C'mon, man, smear that filthy smut all over your face like war paint and charge them trails. Or I guess you can always carry some latex gloves in your purse.


    Quote Originally Posted by ISuckAtRiding
    And if you ride through all this crap, why are you worried about a messy chain getting a little grease on you? That's like getting your hand blown off, but all you're crying about is a hang nail.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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