Vortex sucks balls!

[JoshuaTree]

Originally Posted by OneSickPsycho

Lighter than your shaft drive... that's what they are.

True, but not as 'certain' a power delivery setup. Definitely lower daily, weekly, and monthly maintenance requirements...

[OneSickPsycho]

Originally Posted by JoshuaTree

True, but not as 'certain' a power delivery setup. Definitely lower daily, weekly, and monthly maintenance requirements...

Not than the belt on the Buell.

Here is it's maintenance schedule:





















































.

[marko138]

Originally Posted by OneSickPsycho

Lighter than your shaft drive... that's what they are.

And silky smooth. Atleast on the Buell.

[JoshuaTree]

True that the Buell and other similar belt drive systems are 'maintenance free', but only as a result of truly modern material science. Historically speaking, shaft drive bikes have been lower cost to maintain and have longer service intervals. Even BMW has moved to belt drive systems for their F800 street bikes. Chains (and perhaps belts, but I do not have engineering data to 'prove it') are more efficient at transmitting torque, but the loss is not material to the power usage of a typical street bike.

YMMV...

[OneSickPsycho]

Originally Posted by JoshuaTree

True that the Buell and other similar belt drive systems are 'maintenance free', but only as a result of truly modern material science. Historically speaking, shaft drive bikes have been lower cost to maintain and have longer service intervals. Even BMW has moved to belt drive systems for their F800 street bikes. Chains (and perhaps belts, but I do not have engineering data to 'prove it') are more efficient at transmitting torque, but the loss is not material to the power usage of a typical street bike.

YMMV...

If you're looking at power loss through the mechanics of the system, the hierarchy goes (least to most) shaft, belt, chain. Beamer prolly went to shaft because their riders don't care about weight.

[JoshuaTree]

Originally Posted by OneSickPsycho

If you're looking at power loss through the mechanics of the system, the hierarchy goes (least to most) shaft, belt, chain. Beamer prolly went to shaft because their riders don't care about weight.

Actually, the choice was made based on the 'state of the art' in chains all those years ago. Most modern bike riders are spoiled by O/X/W/Whatever-Ring Chains that maintain their lubrication internally and benefit from truly modern metallurgy. As for weight, well saving ounces on a bike is not a consideration for most BMW riders - we prefer adding things to our bikes that make us safer and more comfortable. Its what allows us to keep riding when you 'weight' and 'style' freaks park your bikes for the "winter"... We just keep riding...

[marko138]

Originally Posted by JoshuaTree

Actually, the choice was made based on the 'state of the art' in chains all those years ago. Most modern bike riders are spoiled by O/X/W/Whatever-Ring Chains that maintain their lubrication internally and benefit from truly modern metallurgy. As for weight, well saving ounces on a bike is not a consideration for most BMW riders - we prefer adding things to our bikes that make us safer and more comfortable. Its what allows us to keep riding when you 'weight' and 'style' freaks park your bikes for the "winter"... We just keep riding...

I can understand that...but I don't park mine for winter b/c of 'weight' or 'style'. I park b/c its FUCKING COLD outside...and I don't like riding a single track vehicle on snow and ice....they handle funny.

[Particle Man]

dayum, that sucker is chewed up

[JoshuaTree]

Originally Posted by marko138

... I don't like riding a single track vehicle on snow and ice....they handle funny.

On this we agree. Completely.