Forum menu
Belt drive: is it a...
 

[Closed] Belt drive: is it as efficent, next big thing?

Posts: 15
Full Member
Topic starter
 
[#474981]

Mate and I were discussing this at the weekend. We both think that internal gearboxes are 'the future' but couldn't agree on whether a belt drive would be as efficent as a chain?


 
Posted : 15/04/2009 6:55 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

not in UK slop and grime(tm)


 
Posted : 15/04/2009 6:57 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

The mainissue with belts is stopping stones getting into them - that wrecks the belts. Used on road motorcycles with big guards to stop the stones. Even BMW won't use it on offroad motorcycles
[img] [/img]


 
Posted : 15/04/2009 7:01 pm
Posts: 7972
Free Member
 

other than being clean they have no real advantage over a chain


 
Posted : 15/04/2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Ok on a road bike then?


 
Posted : 15/04/2009 7:19 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

AFAIK belts are more efficient than chains because they don't wear and stretch the way chains do.

However, hub gears are still less efficient than derailleurs, so the overall change would be a drop in efficiency.


 
Posted : 15/04/2009 7:22 pm
Posts: 7972
Free Member
 

also you need an E-stay bike or a split rear triangle to get the belt in there.


 
Posted : 15/04/2009 7:25 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

belts are [u]less[/u] efficient: a chain properly adjusted is over 98% efficient.
belts last longer is why the motorcycle manufacturers started using them, so theoretically they would be more economical. But they're such a PITA to fit that they are still a rarity.


 
Posted : 15/04/2009 7:44 pm
Posts: 8400
Full Member
 

[url= http://www.moonglu.com/product.aspx?id=488 ]Nicolai Argon[/url]


 
Posted : 15/04/2009 8:10 pm
Posts: 66109
Full Member
 

Belts aren't less efficient than chains on motorbikes, they're almost identical in performance when new but chains lose efficiency over time while belts don't. Don't know if that's a valid comparison for pushbikes of course, the stresses are different. Oh, Buell use belts on their sort-of-off-roader, the Ulysses, and still offer the lifetime warranty.

But for pushbikes, chains are simple, light, and flexible. I can't see that belts offer any advantage over that.


 
Posted : 15/04/2009 8:43 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

Also if a belt fails you're completely screwed whereas a chain you can just take a link out and not use your big cogs. They don't need lubricating as readily and won't stretch as quickly though. Also if adopted would have the opportunity to be far less expensive than a chain due to material costs, number of components and assembly complexity.


 
Posted : 15/04/2009 9:43 pm
Posts: 36
Free Member
 

I would love to see someone "break" a belt on a pushbike....


 
Posted : 15/04/2009 9:55 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

Everyone knows there's rabid belt hungry dogs at the side of the trail all over the country just waiting for this to catch on.


 
Posted : 15/04/2009 10:19 pm
 ji
Posts: 1419
Free Member
 

This thing about needing a split triangle to fit the belt - would it be possible to have the rear cassette outside of the frame, thus removing the need for a more complex frame design? Just a thought - I am sure some clever soul will be along just below to tell me it will never work...


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 7:07 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Did I notice recently that Trek were using then on their bikes ?


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 7:13 am
Posts: 1
Free Member
 

My understanding is that for cycle use the belt has to be run at quite a high tension to avoid slipping, this causes increased friction and reduces efficiency.


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 7:14 am
Posts: 36
Free Member
 

ji - one day possibly, but there's too many standards getting in the way first.

Hubs (SS or internally geared) will be designed around chainline inside the rear triangle. If you moved the rear chainline "outside" you would need to move the crank arm out too, increasing Q-factor and potentially bimoechanical problems.

Even if you did move the sprocket outside of the rear triangle, and made the rear triangle narrower using a narrower hub to maintain chainline, you would need to transfer that drive to the tyre (which is on the inside of the triangle), possibly by driving around the axle but through the drop out, inside another sleeve that mounts the hub in the drop out - probably not a great solution. By far and away the tidiest solution is a split rear drop out either welded on as a replacement by a frame builder or a specific build.

Of course, the easiest solution though would be to use an elevated chainstay...but that looks rubbish so would never fly ๐Ÿ™‚


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 7:30 am
Posts: 7563
Free Member
 

Of course, the easiest solution though would be to use an elevated chainstay...but that looks rubbish so would never fly

stick with the "money + buildings" thing stoner ๐Ÿ™‚

E-stays are mechanically quite inefficient. Chainstays stop the BB rotating on the downtube and make things nice and stiff without lots of extra metal - though clearly we can "do" e-stays on bikes as most all suspension bikes have them in one way or another - however they have lower torsional peak loading as the suspension takes the sting out of the drive train tension.

Nicest belt drive I've seen are the GT cruisers, with dropped chainstays. Look lovely them.


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 7:33 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

ji - The Windcheetah recumbent bike uses just such a drive arrangement (with a chain) - Single large chainstay, block on one side, wheel on the other. So it could be done - but as a one-off non-standard design these are expensive.

Still no real benefit over a chain inside the rear end as has been used for a good few years now....


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 7:36 am
 Solo
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I have not actual data to support this, but my feeling is that the Chain will be more efficient.

As for belt drive being "[i]the next big thing[/i]". I would hope not, but then again, we ride in the shadow of an industry which is [b]totally[/b] geared up to selling us all, the next big thing.

I have 4 bikes, all chain drive. I'm not replacing them with belt-driven bikes just because some company [i]cracks[/i] the perceived technical issues involved.

Anyway, as others have pointed out, I just can't see a belt taking the abuse a chain will. Perhaps if I rode bone dry, dusty trails all year round, and if I liked hub-gears/gear boxes.

No, its not for me and it wont be [i]my[/i] must have feature on a bike.

As for Gear boxes, No thanks to them too. I like being able to service my bike, with a minimum of tools. Not something I'd be able to do with a gear box in my bike.

Solo.


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 7:41 am
Posts: 36
Free Member
 

what's a "dropped chainstay"?

though clearly we can "do" e-stays on bikes as most all suspension bikes have them in one way or another

as I said, it would look rubbish ๐Ÿ™‚


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 7:46 am
Posts: 7563
Free Member
 

what's a "dropped chainstay"?

It's elevated downwards ๐Ÿ™‚
[img] [/img]


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 7:50 am
Posts: 36
Free Member
 

and that's supposed to be your preferred, elegant solution is it? ๐Ÿ˜ฏ

new glasses for richards please!

๐Ÿ™‚


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 7:53 am
Posts: 36
Free Member
 

oh look. More eye-popping ugliness! ๐Ÿ™‚

[img] [/img]


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 9:01 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

GTs did look pretty good when i saw them in october. But as far as i'm aware, Hotwheels now have no plans to bring them into UK.


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 9:37 am
Posts: 3449
Free Member
 

I think they're a bit like Blu-ray compared to DVD at the moment: some advantages but not, on the whole, a big enough leap forward to overcome the inertia of sticking with a very good, well-established alternative. It doesn't help the people trying to push them that a lot of people's first thought is probably of something like a thicker, less stretchy elastic band- I know they're not, but I don't have an intuitive idea of how flexible/durable/etc they are, unlike a chain.


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 10:41 am
Posts: 4202
Full Member
 

http://www.singletrackworld.com/2009/02/reviewed-orange-p7-belt-drive-prototype/

I knew I had seen something on them recently!


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 11:08 am
Posts: 1
Free Member
 

Its funny how the Orange prototype always gets a mention but not the Whyte that was doing the rounds quite a bit earlier. ๐Ÿ˜•


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 11:16 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

As for Gear boxes, No thanks to them too. I like being able to service my bike

but the whole point of them is that there [b]IS[/b] no servicing, beyond an occasional oil change - provided, that is, you keep them well away from water ๐Ÿ™


 
Posted : 16/04/2009 11:23 am