Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1] 2  All

Author Topic: Rear chain drive vs belt drive  (Read 8099 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

lilcoot

  • Elite CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 942
  • Scaramoosh! Scaramoosh! Can you do the Fandango?

    • CVO1: '13 FLTCUSE8
Rear chain drive vs belt drive
« on: August 09, 2013, 01:27:23 AM »

Is there any legitimate reason to replace belt drive with chain drive at the rear wheel on a Harley?

Saw an '09 non-CVO Road Glide today with a chain rear wheel drive.  The owner said he had it done after extensive drivetrain mods, including an S&S 124" motor.  He said he had changed to chain drive after breaking the belt not long after doing the performance upgrades.  This seemed odd because I don't recall reading anything here about needing to convert to chain drive after performance mods, but he insisted it's necessary, and not that unusual.

My BS meter was going off, but I had no real information on the subject, besides the shear number of belt drives vs chain drives.  My impression about chain drives is that they are noisier, messier, require more upkeep, and are no stronger than belts.  Having seen the damage a broken chain can do to the casings of quads and dirt bikes, I shudder to think of the damage to a Harley's primary.  The only advantage I can think of is that they are easier to fix, and maybe are less bulky.

Was my BS meter right, or are there more more chain drives out there than I'm aware of?


Logged

hd-dude

  • Global Moderator
  • 5k CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6646
  • 2005 Cherry FLHTCSE2 "Obsession"

    • CVO1: 05 FLHTCSE2
    • Metal Dragon
Re: Rear chain drive vs belt drive
« Reply #1 on: August 09, 2013, 03:38:06 AM »

Your bs meter was right. Chains are stronger, that is a fact but its all in how the bike is ridden. I have replaced snapped belts on bikes with stock 88" and 96"  motors. Guys that like to do burn outs wheelies and hole shots are the ones that need a chain dive. They will also be needing transmission and primary parts in short order too :oops:

a few years back i had a RUB that came in with a fried clutch. He fried it being stupid with the bike. We replaced the clutch for him and when he picked up the bike he was very concerned about the clutch not hooking up enough. I told him it would be fine and when he pulled out of the parking lot he proceeded to whip the RPM's up and dump the clutch, when the belt came flying out of the back of the bike I couldn't help but walk out and tell him that the clutch hooked up..... :huepfenlol2:

grc

  • 10K CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14216
  • AKA Grouchy Old Fart
    • IN


    • CVO1: 2005 SEEG2
Re: Rear chain drive vs belt drive
« Reply #2 on: August 09, 2013, 08:57:57 AM »


Only thing better than a modern belt drive on a street bike would be a shaft drive.  The only "advantage" of a chain drive is the relative ease of roadside repairs assuming you carry spare links and master links.  Hd-dude hit exactly on the reason some folks seem to feel a need to convert to chains.  They abuse the heck out of the bikes, and at least for the short term the chains will hold up a little longer.

I definitely don't miss the bad old days of cleaning and lubing chains, and absolutely don't miss the failures where the chain either whipped off and got flung into the weeds on the side of the road, or much worse got wrapped around some hard parts and locked up the wheel or engine.

Jerry
Logged
Jerry - 2005 Cherry SEEG  -  Member # 1155

H-D and me  -  a classic love / hate relationship.  Current score:  love 40, hate 50, bewildered 10.

Spiderman

  • aka Spiderman "guest"
  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1302

    • CVO1: 2003 FLHRSEI2
    • CVO2: 2007 FLTR (faux CVO)
Re: Rear chain drive vs belt drive
« Reply #3 on: August 09, 2013, 09:08:01 AM »

I've never personally BROKEN a belt but I had the teeth shear off an 86 FXR that I hotrodded to a 100+hp. Of course it was the orginal belt and the incident I'm referring to took place in 94 so hell, the damn belt was 8 years old. Thing is, even when I'm doing good with a diet, I'm never far from 300lbs and I've had bikes with well in excess of 100hp and 110ftlbs an never broke a belt. To back up what Jim is saying though, I don't do hole shots. Never trusted how the rear tire was gonna hook up and have seen many a hole shot go south when the rear end went east or west. Anyway, chains I guess are the choice of racers for strength and service issues. Shaft drives are for little old men who never twist the throttle very much at any time and as such never notice that it takes all those gears and joints awhile to catch up with each other creating a hell of a lag between twisting the throttle and actual launch. - - -my 2 cents on that only, I'm sure there's members out there who just love a shaft.   :o

B B
Logged

grc

  • 10K CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14216
  • AKA Grouchy Old Fart
    • IN


    • CVO1: 2005 SEEG2
Re: Rear chain drive vs belt drive
« Reply #4 on: August 09, 2013, 09:19:25 AM »


OK Brian, just how many shaft drive bikes have you actually owned over the years?  I've owned several, and I'll tell you there was only one real difference when I wacked the throttle.  On a chain or belt drive bike, the rear end tends to squat on acceleration.  My shaft drive bikes did the opposite, with the rear end rising slightly.  Once you get used to that difference, the shaft is great.  There is no additional "slop" or delay in putting the power to the ground; don't forget we aren't talking about the sloppy tolerances Harley uses on their stuff.

Btw, even though Harley doesn't install a shaft drive on their bikes it doesn't mean they don't give us the shaft as often as possible.

Jerry ;)
Logged
Jerry - 2005 Cherry SEEG  -  Member # 1155

H-D and me  -  a classic love / hate relationship.  Current score:  love 40, hate 50, bewildered 10.

Rooster

  • 5k CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5180
  • FLhtcuse2.ORG
Re: Rear chain drive vs belt drive
« Reply #5 on: August 09, 2013, 10:24:34 AM »

I've never personally BROKEN a belt but I had the teeth shear off an 86 FXR that I hotrodded to a 100+hp. Of course it was the orginal belt and the incident I'm referring to took place in 94 so hell, the damn belt was 8 years old. Thing is, even when I'm doing good with a diet, I'm never far from 300lbs and I've had bikes with well in excess of 100hp and 110ftlbs an never broke a belt. To back up what Jim is saying though, I don't do hole shots. Never trusted how the rear tire was gonna hook up and have seen many a hole shot go south when the rear end went east or west. Anyway, chains I guess are the choice of racers for strength and service issues. Shaft drives are for little old men who never twist the throttle very much at any time and as such never notice that it takes all those gears and joints awhile to catch up with each other creating a hell of a lag between twisting the throttle and actual launch. - - -my 2 cents on that only, I'm sure there's members out there who just love a shaft.   :o
B B
One coffee spew for this morning. Thanks B :drink: :huepfenlol2:
Logged

North Georgia Hawg

  • HoneyBadger Don't Give a CHIT...
  • 2.5K CVO Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3345
  • I HATE WINTER!!!

    • CVO1: 2012 FLHXSE3 Hot Citrus/Antique Gunstock
    • CVO2: 2009 Chevy Avalanche LTZ Inferno Orange
    • CVO3: 2001 Ebbtide Mystique 2300: 8-ch 2000 watt audio system, two 12" Kicker subs
Re: Rear chain drive vs belt drive
« Reply #6 on: August 09, 2013, 10:55:01 AM »

OK Brian, just how many shaft drive bikes have you actually owned over the years?  I've owned several, and I'll tell you there was only one real difference when I wacked the throttle.  On a chain or belt drive bike, the rear end tends to squat on acceleration.  My shaft drive bikes did the opposite, with the rear end rising slightly.  Once you get used to that difference, the shaft is great.  There is no additional "slop" or delay in putting the power to the ground; don't forget we aren't talking about the sloppy tolerances Harley uses on their stuff.

Btw, even though Harley doesn't install a shaft drive on their bikes it doesn't mean they don't give us the shaft as often as possible.

Jerry ;)

I had a 1985 Kawasaki ZL900 Eliminator with a shaft drive. And yes, due to the shaft rotating force, the rear end did lift noticeably when accelerating hard. It was kind of fun, really!q

There was no slop in that shaft drive at all... but due to the mass of the shaft and of the gears at the rear end, shaft drives are slightly less efficient at transferring power to the rear wheel than a chain or a belt drive.

My experience with that bike was that the shaft drive was very smooth and quiet, as well as super-reliable... it is a fully-enclosed system. I only had to change the fluid occasionally, and I never had to be concerned with breaking a chain nor a belt. I like shaft drives for that reason.

Ken
Logged

HoneyBadger Don't Care...

TD AK-20s | Drago's S/C/S-4 | SE 259Es | Feuling 8015/7060/Rods | Black Ops Lifters
Cometics | Big Sucker 2 | Energy One +1 Clutch Pack | Hayden BT07 | ClutchWIZ
WPW Fans | TL P7 LEDs/Aux | Dynamic Ringz | Tour Pak | WO 575s | RT 665
Corbin DualTour | BAH Flush Front Axle | Chrome Calipers
The Wizard's Tune

ultrafxr

  • There are no sure answers, only better questions. - Dick Van Dyke
  • 5k CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5467
  • No problem is so small it cannot be misunderstood.
    • TN


    • CVO1: 2020 FLHTCUTG Tahitian Teal
    • CVO2: 2017 FLHTKSE Palladium Silver/Phantom Blue/Wicked Sapphire-traded
    • CVO3: 2012 FLHTCUSE7 Electric Orange/Black Diamond-traded
Re: Rear chain drive vs belt drive
« Reply #7 on: August 09, 2013, 11:27:52 AM »

Had a Suzuki GS in the 80s that had shaft drive. No problem at all. No maintenance except fluid and removing rear wheel was a breeze.
Logged



Places ridden on my bike from my driveway.
IBA member # 45520

05Train

  • Mind is not for rent
  • Elite CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 769
Re: Rear chain drive vs belt drive
« Reply #8 on: August 09, 2013, 06:56:29 PM »

Yup, I miss the shaft drive on my GS/A.  I could have the rear wheel off in about the same time it takes to remove the bags from my CVO. 


Sent from my iPad, probably while I'm pooping.
Logged
The best you've had is the best you know.

Fired00d

  • Global Moderator
  • 25K CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 32641
  • Orange & Black SEEG... Can it get any better?
    • VA


    • CVO1: FLHTCSE
Re: Rear chain drive vs belt drive
« Reply #9 on: August 09, 2013, 07:06:54 PM »

My first bike was '79 XS1100 Yamaha w/shaft drive that I put a 4-n-1 Kerker Header and "Drag" handlebars on. Didn't know any better (at the time I was young, dumb, and full of..) and I rode that bike like I stole it. I did burnouts and wheelies like it was nobody's business and never had any trouble out of it. As was mentioned earlier it was weird having the rear end rise on hard accelerations vs. squatting as chain/belt drives do.

 :pumpkin:
Ride Safe,
Fired00d
 :fireman:
Logged
:pumpkin: 2004 Screamin’ Eagle Electra Glide :pumpkin:
Rinehart True Duals
SE Breather
SE Race Tuner
HogTunes Speakers
Zippers 575 Gear Drive Cams
Zippers Pro-Tapered Adjustable Push Rods
Zippers Oil Pressure Bypass Shim
Feuling Oil Pump
Feuling Lifters
Zumo 550 W/Flame Caps
Lyndall Z+ Brake Pads
CVOHarley Member #1234
PGR Member #754 (Since '05)
Proud Member EBCM #2.0

moscooter

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1270
Re: Rear chain drive vs belt drive
« Reply #10 on: August 09, 2013, 07:32:59 PM »

 ::)
"My shaft drive bikes did the opposite, with the rear end rising slightly. "

Jerry,  exactly correct.   I used to ride a buddys 750 Suzuki with the shaft drive.   The pinion gear makes an attempt to "climb up" the ring gear ands thus raises the rear of the suspension.  When you would let off the throttle,  the rear would settle back down.............kinda strange feeling. :confused5:
Logged

MadCVORG

  • '11 FLTRUSE
  • Senior CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 317
Re: Rear chain drive vs belt drive
« Reply #11 on: August 09, 2013, 08:14:39 PM »

I started out on an '82 Yamaha Maxim 650 shaft. Although the rear end climbed a bit on throttle, I got used to it. Had some concern on the Harley belts, but I never had a problem with mine.....and that's 18 years on the original.
Logged

timo482

  • Elite CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 860
Re: Rear chain drive vs belt drive
« Reply #12 on: August 09, 2013, 08:19:27 PM »

ya, well where the problem is is in corners

if you are in a corner a bit too hard with a shaft drive - and freak out and get off the throttle the rear drops, firmly planting whatever bit of metal you heard that made you freak out solidly into the surface of the road sending you directly into the ditch, tree, guardrail, etc at the outside of the turn. :o

so if you have your wits about you you have to get on the throttle more and hope you run out of curve before the rear end quits rising...  :'(

the rest of the time a shaft drive is quite nice

recently there have been issues ive read of some beaners with final drive problems - when a final goes out it makes a belt look positively perfect

but i never drive like that anymore, ride a ultra with a sidecar and avoid the whole thing........

to
Logged

Fired00d

  • Global Moderator
  • 25K CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 32641
  • Orange & Black SEEG... Can it get any better?
    • VA


    • CVO1: FLHTCSE
Re: Rear chain drive vs belt drive
« Reply #13 on: August 09, 2013, 08:42:10 PM »

ya, well where the problem is is in corners

if you are in a corner a bit too hard with a shaft drive - and freak out and get off the throttle the rear drops, firmly planting whatever bit of metal you heard that made you freak out solidly into the surface of the road sending you directly into the ditch, tree, guardrail, etc at the outside of the turn. :o

so if you have your wits about you you have to get on the throttle more and hope you run out of curve before the rear end quits rising...  :'(

the rest of the time a shaft drive is quite nice

recently there have been issues ive read of some beaners with final drive problems - when a final goes out it makes a belt look positively perfect

but i never drive like that anymore, ride a ultra with a sidecar and avoid the whole thing........

to

Back in the day when I had the bike w/the shaft drive I was hanging off the side of the bike in the corners so there was no letting off the throttle. :D :D Now that I'm older (mature) and have bionic (replacement parts) I don't do that anymore. :(

 :pumpkin:
Ride Safe,
Fired00d
 :fireman:
Logged
:pumpkin: 2004 Screamin’ Eagle Electra Glide :pumpkin:
Rinehart True Duals
SE Breather
SE Race Tuner
HogTunes Speakers
Zippers 575 Gear Drive Cams
Zippers Pro-Tapered Adjustable Push Rods
Zippers Oil Pressure Bypass Shim
Feuling Oil Pump
Feuling Lifters
Zumo 550 W/Flame Caps
Lyndall Z+ Brake Pads
CVOHarley Member #1234
PGR Member #754 (Since '05)
Proud Member EBCM #2.0

spada84

  • Elite CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 634
  • Stand for something, or fall for anything.

    • CVO1: '10 SEUC "Orange Crush"
    • CVO2: 6 (or 7) other bikes
Re: Rear chain drive vs belt drive
« Reply #14 on: August 09, 2013, 09:56:48 PM »

My Moto Guzzi 2000 V11 Sport does not experience shaft jacking, but it has a complex swing arm arrangement.  My other 2 MGs do lift the rear, but not an issue once you are used to it. 

Belt is my overall preference, except when I'm putting on a new rear tire.
Logged
Spada84
NoSofa!
Pages: [1] 2  All
 

Page created in 0.192 seconds with 20 queries.