| Author | Message | ||
     Buellfighter |
Yeah, what sloppy said. Belts are great for driving blowers and cams, but don't forget air conditioner compressors! | ||
| Spatten1 |
You like belts because they drive 1-5 horsepower engine driven accessories? Belts are great for vacuum cleaners too. (Message edited by spatten1 on June 13, 2007) | ||
| Tpoppa |
Accessory belts have nothing to do with drive belts. I prefer the belt because: It's Quiet It's Low maintenance It's Clean I really like the Lash free driveline | ||
| Ragnagwar |
Belts are better for holding up jeans too. I tried a 530 chain but my pants kept falling down around my ankles  | ||
| Firebolteric_ma |
Funny, this thread is like all the others on the subject. Consistently running in circles, like a dog chasing his tail. Round and round we go... Put what YOU WANT on YOUR BIKE! Screw what the others say! | ||
| Buellrcr |
if your riding on the street go with a belt if you race you got to have a chain | ||
| Mutation_racer |
I second that | ||
| Metalstorm |
I third that  | ||
| Sloppy |
I'm pretty sure those TF belts drive transfer ~ 1000 hp through that blower. Also, alot of dragsters use belt drive for their cam drives as well now... Impressive, no? I also recall that non "o" ring chains transfer energy at ~ 97%, but only when clean. While Belts transfer ~ 95% all the time. I used to use a chain to keep my pants up, but I could never make it to the bathroom on time cause I couldn't press out the pins quickly enough... | ||
| Spiderman |
Hey Slops, Have to change a belt on your S3 yet? | ||
| Spatten1 |
I'm pretty sure those TF belts drive transfer ~ 1000 hp through that blower. Also, alot of dragsters use belt drive for their cam drives as well now... You are confusing the power needed to spin the blower gears with the power that comes off of the crankshaft. If it took 1000hp to spin the blower and the engine made 1001 hp then the result would be a 1 horsepower package. | ||
| 07xb12scg |
Does anybody know the tensile strength of the Buell drive belt? | ||
| Buellrcr |
i know on a dresser you could take one cord out of out of the belt and hang a dresser from it | ||
| Gentleman_jon |
The problem with the belt is not really tensile strength. The Kevlar fibers used to reinforce the belt are stronger than steel per unit of weight, and they have the advantage of having very low stretch, and "creep" which is stretch over a prolonged time period. However, Kevlar has a lot of other qualities, which make it unsuitable for a high load application like the Buell belt. 1. It has poor shock loading qualities. 2. It is brittle, and has low abrasion resistance and therefore looses strength when turned around small radii like the front pulley. 3. It absorbs water and looses strength. 4. It does not adhere to other materials, such as the rubber cover of a drive belt, so the belt is not a true composite structurally. Sadly, there does not seem to be any other fiber that combines the weight to strength, and low stretch of Kevlar at this time. The result of these material considerations is that the belt, although more than strong enough to carry the load of the Buell application, looses strength over time due to impact loads, water infiltration, and bending and the abrasion caused by turning over the pulleys, especially the front one. While only a small fraction of the post 03 belts have failed, the failure rate is too high for a safety related item, and shows that the safety factor of this design is simply too low. Anyone who has done any serious sailboat racing has probably experienced a sheet or halyard parting suddenly and without warning. I used the stuff briefly on my ocean racer, but I got rid of it because I was afraid someone was going to get killed if a line let go offshore in a gale. The fact that the individual belts are sliced from one large wide belt means that the kevlar fibers are exposed to water infiltration, as can be seem by looking at the edge of the belt. What this all means is that the Goodyear belt in the normal Buell application is subject to a variety of failure inducing problems, and they all seem to fail in the same way: simple plastic yield in tension, but at no predictable time. That is why virtually no other high performance sport bike on planet earth has chosen to use belts over chain, and even Buell does not use it for racing. And that's why you won't find it on Lil' Blackie, or any of the other chain gang bikes: once you have had the experience of a completely unexpected belt failure, you are unlikely to want a repeat.  | ||
| Spatten1 |
That is why virtually no other high performance sport bike on planet earth has chosen to use belts over chain, and even Buell does not use it for racing. And that's why you won't find it on Lil' Blackie, or any of the other chain gang bikes: once you have had the experience of a completely unexpected belt failure, you are unlikely to want a repeat. +1 | ||
| Sloppy |
Consider that a top fuel dragster makes on the order of 10,000 HP. I figured that 10% of the power goes to spin the blower... so, yea, a belt is truely being used to transfer 1000 HP!!! I run 300 hp reciprocating refrigeration compressors -- do we use chain drive? No, it's all belts Funny, a lot of belts are used in high horsepower applications, I wonder why... Let's truely understand why chains are used in racing -- to quickly change gear ratios and lighter weight. It has nothing to do with the ability to transfer power, low maint., wear or failure rates. And guess what, I've never had a belt fail on my Buell... and it's a 2000, riden all year round... been to Laguna Seca, Button Willow and Thunderhill, Death Valley, over the Sierra's and along the West Coast. It's had rain, hail, sand, heat (120F!), cold (25F) and never failed, never needed lubricant, never needed adjustment. I wish my chain driven bikes could say the same. Have I ever broken a chain on my other bikes? No, but they require infinitely more maintenance than a belt! Belts loose strength over time? Yea, after 100,000 miles it's time for a change. For a chain, it lasts ~ 15,000 miles (if lucky) and requires a sprocket change as well. Poor shock loading characterstics for a belt??? Belts are a preferred method of driving cams because of its ability to absrob shocks from the crank. And they don't stretch over time like chains do. Chains have no ability to absorb shock when compared to belts. Okay, how many times have you had to adjust the chain on your primary vs. the number of times you had to adjust the tension on the belt drive? It's the same power going through it... and the chain drive is multi-row!!! In terms of performance, belts are very hard to beat. In terms of weight and ease of replacement, chains are hard to beat. If the Chain Gang wants to run chains, then great -- that's cool. But to say that chain drive is superior to belt is a far stretch... that is, for a chain The best advantage I see for a chain is that it is easier to swap out. I admit, belts are hard to get to and a pain to replace -- no argument there! Run a chain drive and a belt drive continuously in sea water... anyone want to bet which one will last longer??? | ||
| Spatten1 |
Consider that a top fuel dragster makes on the order of 10,000 HP. I figured that 10% of the power goes to spin the blower... so, yea, a belt is truely being used to transfer 1000 HP!!! Did you make that number up for argument's sake? Does it really take 1000hp to pump air into the engine? Please show the source for that statistic, and the width of the belt, and the replacement interval. | ||
| Sloppy |
"A blower mounted on a top fuel dragster engine can siphon off as much as several hundred horsepower..." http://www.aa1car.com/library/supercharge.htm Okay, maybe the number is 5% on 8,000 hp (there is no dyno that can handle these engines so no one knows for sure -- the point clearly is: 1. The power required to drive a blower is significantly more than what it takes to drive your Buell. 2. No one in racing uses a chain, but instead, a belt, to drive said blower. Ergo, even though a chain is lighter and easier to replace, to be competative in racing, EVERYONE uses a belt because it can transfer power better than a chain... Again, belt vs. chain, who cares -- its up to what you use it for. Belt has its share of advantages and so does chain. A belt transfers power more reliably, more of it and with less maintenance. A chain is easier to replace and is lighter. Pick which one you want... If you maintained a chain drive with as much care as what you need a belt, I'd be surprised if the chain drive lasted 3,000 miles. | ||
| Spatten1 |
In that case the engineers at Buell should call the blower companies, because the belts on Buells break. The salesman at the dealership I went to yesterday has a 9R and has broken two belts. If you don't break 'em, great, belts are better for you in every way. But If you've had one broken belt and gotten stranded, then you would not be so excited about the lack of maintenance. | ||
| 07xb12scg |
Blower belts are something like 5x as wide as Buell belts. Of course they will be able to withstand more! | ||
| Spiderman |
I am no blower expert, but from the looks of a blower setup I could change a blower belt a WHOLE lot easier than the belt on my bike. You are making comparisons that are apples to oranges. Do the blower belts have kevlar in them? What are there construction and specs and handling instructions? | ||
| Sloppy |
Webhead, I'm not your librarian... try an internet search... here's what I found. http://www.gates.com/brochure.cfm?brochure=5051&lo cation_id=557 http://www.gates.com/index.cfm?location_id=534 I'd look at other issues rather than the design cause it sure works for a whole lot of people in many applications... SURPRISE! Now Gates Poly Chain® GT®2 Belt Drives Can Replace Roller Chain – Size for Size. Think Poly Chain® GT®2 belt drives for new, improved OEM product designs. Quiet. Clean. Maintenance-free. Longer lasting. And now cost competitive – size for size! ... http://www.gates.com/landing/index.cfm?ls=1&go=btg atpco0805 The only time I'd be excited about breaking down is if I was at the Bunny Ranch!!! And, they don't carry any extra chains either... Hello Pahrump! Can we just get on with these facts: Belts are stronger than chains and require less maintenance. Chains are lighter than belts and are easier to change. Of course, you have to be lucky enough to breakdown next to a store that sells 530 chain to take advantage of the "easier to change" bit... There, done -- move along folks, nothing to see here... (Message edited by sloppy on June 14, 2007) | ||
| Ridrx |
Cool links. Anyone taking bets on who sees the first jap bike sporting a belt? | ||
| Sloppy |
Funny, no one has taken my bet on which will last longer while continuously running in corrosive conditions (sea water, pressure washer, dirt, you name it?). Chain or belt??? I can't think of too many conditions where a chain would last longer... And oh, BMW sure thought belt drive was the right way to go with their new 85 HP bikes... hmm, I wonder why? Apparantly the accountants didn't get a hold of the designers because belts are more expensive... | ||
| Jwhite601 |
Chains are stronger, period. If you are clutching up wheelies and powershifting or racing. If you ride like a granny, (which i can tell alot of you do) you may never break a belt. (Message edited by jwhite601 on June 14, 2007) | ||
| Thepup |
Sloppy,how many chains have broken after a few thousand miles on new bikes?I run a belt still(an 03 belt at that)but a chain would be 100 times easier to locate anywhere,also you are not tied to any certain dealer for a chain,unlike a belt.Chains have many advantages over a belt,some of those might not be needed by you,but they are still there. | ||
| Sloppy |
Yep, you're absolutely right. Chains are easier to replace and as long as you broke down close to a bike shop you can get the right chain and get back on the road. Of course, with Dennis Kirk but an internet connection away, you can get almost any part you need within 24 hours... I do know this though, I've had to replace infinitely (yes, that would be infinite -- I'll let the mathmeticians figure that one out) more chains compared to the number of belts I've had to replace -- so chains darn well BETTER be easier to change out! I also spend 100 times more time taking care of my chain bike than I have to spend on the belt drive... To give credit to Jw, it is hard to compare strength between chains and belts due to lack of having a common comparison. However, it has been shown that belts can hold up to whatever power adder you can put into a Buell. Of course if Jw wants to say that the only reason they last is because we ride like grannies, well, why won't you try the same analogy with your helmet??? For those that have had belt issues, perhaps this may help: "Like roller chain drives, synchronous belt drives are sensitive to misalignment and should not be used on systems where it is inherent to the drive operation. Misalignment leads to inconsistent belt wear and premature tensile failure due to unequal tensile member loading. " http://www.gates.com/brochure.cfm?brochure=5262&lo cation_id=6196 A "tensile failure" would be a "belt snap"... perhaps it's not a belt issue but an alignment issue? Then, when you convert to chain you have the ability to align the chain and thus don't see the issue any more??? Perhaps we need to get the adjusters back on the swingarm??? (Message edited by sloppy on June 14, 2007) | ||
| Spatten1 |
"Like roller chain drives, synchronous belt drives are sensitive to misalignment and should not be used on systems where it is inherent to the drive operation. Misalignment leads to inconsistent belt wear and premature tensile failure due to unequal tensile member loading. " That's fantastic Sloppy. Please send me the procedures for belt alignment on XBs. | ||
| Sloppy |
Sure thing: 1. shim pulley (Message edited by sloppy on June 14, 2007) | ||
| Spiderman |
Webhead, I'm not your librarian... Maybe. But you are trying to argue a point and to successfully do so you need to support said argument with facts and data. |
