What's So Great About Belt Drive?

[MeanieRider]

I have a curiousity question and I'm really interested in what people have to say - A lot of the new Kawi's have belt drive and I noticed that a lot of people are happy about that.

I have a Vulcan 1600 with a shaft drive and (so far) have had no problems and I think the bike handles beautifully. I don't feel any "jacking" or those other things people talk about.

I know more horsepower gets to the rear wheel with a belt, but to me - reliability is one of the most important things. It seems to me that shaft drive provides a great ride and is known to need the least mainenance and be the most reliable. Those are huge plusses in my mind.

Can someone give my their opinion why belt is better and/or why it seems that most people on this forum (at least that I noticed) seem happier that Kawi is switching to belt drive? Thanks a lot.

[rldowns3]

To be quite honest, I think belt drive is easier to maintain, don't have to disassemble it and grease it like you do shaft from time to time. Less power loss, i.e. more hp to rear wheel as you stated. Some think it looks better, some don't, so it's an asthetics issue as well.

[CootoronScooter]

Belts have gotten better and better over the years. Plus it takes less material and $$$ to make a belt drive than machining gears for a shaft drive. Plus it saves weight.

[fritzi93]

That about sums it up: ease of maintenance, better power transfer, etc.

I've not yet had a bike with belt drive, but had a couple with shaft and several with chain. Personally, I always preferred chain dive, being used to dealing with it ...and not knowing any better.

[jac4xt]

Belts have very little maintenance involved. Just checking for damage and checking the tension. Never ridden a shaft driven bike for any distance, but when I was buying the 900 I looked at the Suzuki C50 also. Test rode that and didn't notice anything about the shaft drive I didn't like. I think one benefit of the belt is if something does go wrong with it chances are you just gotta pop a new belt on. I imagine (not sure of course) that if the shaft drive breaks that is gonna be more expensive to fix. Both are great though.

[rldowns3]

Originally Posted by jac4xt

Belts have very little maintenance involved. Just checking for damage and checking the tension. Never ridden a shaft driven bike for any distance, but when I was buying the 900 I looked at the Suzuki C50 also. Test rode that and didn't notice anything about the shaft drive I didn't like. I think one benefit of the belt is if something does go wrong with it chances are you just gotta pop a new belt on. I imagine (not sure of course) that if the shaft drive breaks that is gonna be more expensive to fix. Both are great though.

Usually what winds up happening with shafts is folks neglect them and forget to grease the shaft and splines and it eats the splines out and that's pretty expensive. Seen it all too many times.

[BOURBON BOY]

I've rode mainly shaft drive bikes on the street, and all my dirt bikes were chain. Never had any problems with either. Some of the older shaft drive bikes I owned had short swingarms and the torque from the motor would cause the rear to move up & down a lot. This was a big deal when cornering. A shaft drive is more "bulletproof" so to speak, and basicly requires no maint. About the only thing to ever worry about is a seal going out. Most of the high powered cruisers, and touring bikes ARE shaft drive (Rocket III, new 200 hp V-MAX, Goldwings, BMW's to name a few) Some Beemers take it up a notch and use a single sidded swingarm and the wheel is attached with lug nuts like a car, talk about easy maintaince! A well placed rock will destroy a belt drive, but that is somewhat rare, but it does happen. Which ever drive you get or get stuck with--you still have to lube the swingarm anyway so I really don't see much of a advantage for either. On a big touring bike who wants to take off a hard bag to check belt tension? Wouldn't it be easier just to ride the darn thing a keep preventive maintaince to a min.? BB

Originally Posted by jac4xt

... I imagine (not sure of course) that if the shaft drive breaks that is gonna be more expensive to fix. Both are great though.

Which entails taking the rear wheel and swing arm off.

And given what I've read/heard about belts getting shredded by a piece of gravel... makes me think I'd rather pass on the belt drive.

[rldowns3]

You only gotta really worry about gravel if you remove the belt guards on most factory bikes...actually I haven't seen one without some kind of belt guard.

[MeanieRider]

Thanks everyone for your informative responses. Keep them coming. This is a great group; I learn a lot from you people...

[Saleenguy]

Myself I prefer shaft drive as my first choice.

Will take a chain second.

And would want belt drive as my third choice.

[rfb92345]

There are advantages and disadvantages to all three. That being said, the differences betwwen them is not enough to make a decision on which bike to buy. More importantly...does the bike move you? Does it fit you? Does it meet your needs?.......If it does all that, it make no difference it what kind of final drive it has.