shaft drive or chain / belt drive

[coachgeo]

Some interesting discussions out there.

Here is something that hit me that you folk might find interesting

...The main con for shaft is the power loss, which is approximately 18%, chains drives have approximately 11% power loss from the crank. So this clearly dictates shaft drive isn't the best solution for very high performance road racing bikes. But for our consumer use adventure and adventure touring bikes, where 7% power difference wouldn't be noticed, I think we can argue about the cons and pros of each system.

Personally I prefer the shaft-drive. On BMW paralever, you can repair it on the road too, if you know how to do it. You need to carry a main bearing and/or a main seal just in case. They cost less than a good chain set, weight less and take less room carrying them with you. http://www.horizonsunlimited.com/hubb/w ... ve-32357-2

this was debated later.... by nonother but a user on this board. Good reading.

another from same site brings up a good point though

...I suggest that with a good chainoiler there is no longer a need for shaft drive. I've had fantastic kilometrage out of my chains (Africa Twin) since fitting a Scottoiler.

I think that this allows a much wider choice of bikes for you. Get a chain drive and fit that oiler.

Shaft drive is of course, still an excellent choice, but the oiler opens up possibilities...

finally a point about belt drive

... consider the alternative - BELTS. In addition to being long lived (life/100k miles on Buells), they are quieter, cleaner and lower maintenance due to no lubrication requirements, they are much lighter (~1 pound in weight versus 4.5+ pounds for chain). This means lower unsprung weight, and advantage in both handling and ride comfort. Also, they do possess a certain capacity for vibration damping. http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_shaft_driv ... ive_better

[XLerate]

Thanks, CoachGeo!

Sorry to say I'm of the suspicion that shaft drive wasn't introduced, developed and pushed due to its clear superiority over chain drive. No, not at all! Shaft drive has its own inherent drawbacks and they're many.

Mechanical complexity, torque steer, notable weight penalty, complexity of breakdown/repair, initial cost, overall cost per lifespan, actual comparative lifespan all indicate that this was not 'invented' for the sake of revolutionizing the motorcycle world for the sake of owners.

Rather it's about the same as mfgr's computerized systems, computer ignition systems, or the mfgr's habit of producing all different parts that won't fit anything else in their entire product line history. In other words, they own you if you own their bike. That's helped when the aftermarket may catch up on some of it, but that's a rare occurrence overall.

I believe the whole point was to insure mfgr's some much greater profits and not much else.

Belt drive on the other hand offers all sorts of advantage over the original chain drives.