You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Now the weather is grim, I've been mulling singlespeeding again. I've got a belt-drive (Alfine) Cannondale Bad Boy commuting on the road and love the belt drive on that so was wondering if there's any reason why it wouldn't work on an MTB?
Does anyone make one? Try as I might I can't find anyone other Olsen bikes who are great and local but I can't justify £2k for a frame at the moment!
Or use the Veers split belt system and put it on your existing bike
Ah STW, you always deliver. Will look at these two recos!
Just ignore me. Deleted as it was a crap comment.
I recall a video on YT where a guy assesses the pros and cons of belt drive, and one of the issues he mentioned was frame stiffness, it has to be a certain stiffness at the rear or the belt won’t work that well.
This guy. He’s done a fair few miles on them.
I've heard it works fine as long as the frame is well designed, also Ryan Van Duzer on YouTube did a good video on why he snapped a belt and what he did wrong that caused it. Tension and remounting a dropped belt without releasing the tension first I recall.
Shand is also another frame option. Not sure but I suspect any frame builder using Paragon dropouts could be split for a belt?
I've done a fair bit of research into this, and came up with the following thoughts: Belts great for commuting / touring etc, stick with chains for MTB.
There were a lot of stories of belts not being up to 'proper' MTB use. The term 'fred' was banded about a lot on USA-based forums, which I think is a term for the sort of person who turns up at Llandegla on a weekend and complains about the parking charges, does a lap on their eBike and then has a massive lunch at the cafe (removes tongue from cheek). Basically a few frame builders said that 'freds' liked them but proper riders had lots of trouble.
Stuff like stones and grit and mud getting between the belt and sprockets and causing damage leading to belts snapping seemed to be the ley. Yes the sprockets have mud ports and it should shed - but in the real world, I'm not sure it works exactly as intended.
Belts are also pretty fragile, a glance off the edge of a rock step can create enough damage to cause a belt breaking. Expensive to either replace it and / or carry a spare. They also don't like being bent backwards, so that means no idler / tensioner and you need a stiff frame to prevent them skipping.
I looked into the Veer system but wasn't for me - couldn't get the sprockets / gear ratio to work out as I wanted (Gates have a lot more options / choice in this regard).
All of the above is what I've gleaned from teh internetz, so may be bollocks, but it made sense to me.
All in all... I am about to convert my commuter to belt drive, don't think it's for MTB duties yet.
The belts don't like being bent backwards a lot but can be bent backwards. Quite a few gearbox full suspension bikes use a belt and a tensioner and have been given the ok by Gates. See Nicolai for one example.
For me the only pro of a belt is it's clean, hence being ideal for city bikes but for a single speed off road bike, especially for winter use, I'd stick with a normal chain.
Remember midland trailquest Graham? - he converted his MTB to belts and kept on breaking them but I think an outlier
Shand use belts on some of their MTBs and road bikes either SS or with rohloff so they must have confidence but I have gone for chain drive with my rohloff shand for the simple fix or replace and also as altering gearing is much easier. Maybe i am wrong but carrying a couple of chain links to fix a broken chain ( although I have only ever broken one in many decades of riding) is easier than carrying a belt and a worn out chain can be replaced anywhere especially on a rohloff bike as any chain will do.
If i was buying a new commuter / utility bike I would go belt and IGH. for offroad and remote areas I prefer chain
Remember midland trailquest Graham
I was going to say the same thing TJ. I think MTQ had a habit of breaking stuff, but suffered many of the problems that earlier poster has hinted at; stones and debris puncturing/peircing the belt, an slipping under power and in the muck of winter. One long thread about this there had a couple of others who'd suffered the same fate, seemingly OK belts suddenly snapping, and the culprit being abraded belts giving way unexpectedly.
Has it's place I'm sure, but I don't think they other much over chains in the long term.
Not mountain biking, but my work bike has a belt drive and I wouldn't recommend it, it's sooooo draggy (paired to 8 speed Alfine). For comparison I have another bike with the same rear hub and a normal chain which is loads better. It has been reliable though, but SS chains are cheap as chips, so does it really matter?
Really useful info, thanks all. I did wonder if the mud and stones would be the issue.
@ross980 - my commuter is a belt drive / Alfine set up, and I love it, don’t notice the drag at all.
You'd still be hard pushed to beat a fixed gear with a chain for commuting - cheaper and more simple than belt. Commuted 5 days a week, all year round with my fixie.
For me, one of the joys of singlespeeding, especially through winter is that it is cheap, i buy 9 speed chains when i see them for £8-9 and chuck a new one on every couple of months, i can't see an advantage to the belt drive for SS, other than it is a bit different?
The term ‘fred’ was banded about a lot on USA-based forums, which I think is a term for the sort of person who turns up at Llandegla on a weekend and complains about the parking charges, does a lap on their eBike and then has a massive lunch at the cafe (removes tongue from cheek). Basically a few frame builders said that ‘freds’ liked them but proper riders had lots of trouble.
Ooh, I know this one!
A Fred is someone who has all kinds of weird kit just because it works for him and he doesn't care what anyone else thinks about it. Usually an old guy who has discovered this over several decades of trial and error. Also usually into long distance events.
.
You know the guy who has an old steel MTB frame with drop bars, a weird hand warmer thing over the hoods, a rack and pannier on the back, wears a mixture of running kit and his hiking gear and yet seems able keep up with the whippersnappers on the club run until they get tired and go home and then carries on alone to get his 200 miles in? That's a Fred.
They would like a belt drive.
.
Yours sounds more like a Karen🤣
Oh, apparently I was using the British version of Fred, the Americanism sounds more like what you were thinking
.
In the UK, an early usage of the word is the more common—used by 'serious' roadies to refer to (often) bearded, sandal-wearing, touring cyclists without any high-tech gear.[citation needed] This usage still survives in the US. David Bernstein, presenter of The FredCast says the term is "used by 'serious' roadies to disparage utility cyclists and touring riders, especially after these totally unfashionable 'freds' drop the 'serious' roadies on hills because the 'serious' guys were really posers."
Recently, particularly in the US, a Fred is more often somebody with higher quality and more expensive gear than his or her talent would warrant. For example, a Fred could be guy with little cycling experience who watches the highlights of a few Tour de France stages, then goes to a bike store and buys a Trek carbon fiber Madone in Team Discovery colors, along with Team Discovery shorts and jersey, and then rides it on a cycling path at 15 mph (25 km/h).
Educational! Nice.
I guess that makes me a Fred though. Ouch.
I think Pipedream would be compatible, I know the ALICE certainly is. Think Swarf are too.
They also don’t like being bent backwards
The timing belts in every car I've ever owned would beg to differ on that. That's basically what these are.
Are they though? I've handled both types of belt extensively and they have a distincly different feel when bent 'backwards'.
I guess that makes me a Fred though. Ouch.
British or American?
The British version is sort of a compliment
I'm lost. What's a Fred?
So Fred is almost MTQG...sounds exactly like him apart from the bit where destroyed components seemed to follow MTQG around...
I've done a few longer organised off road rides/ races and there always seems to be someone with a belt drive stopped by the side of the trail swearing at the belt as soon as it gets proper muddy
Remember midland trailquest Graham?
I remember a 12 hour race where I am sure I saw him (wearing vegan related kit?) do about 30m an hour as he kept having issues with the belt drive.
OP, I'd echo the later comments where a chain driven SS is the most sensible choice offroad. Why invite potential extra hassle and faff in what should be the simplest bike off road?
Why invite potential extra hassle and faff in what should be the simplest bike off road?
I don't know but it is the sort of thing I do
Got a Shand Bahookie belt drive SS that I use about 50pct of the time and it's been faultless for years. It's my zombie apocalypse bike that just keeps running and that includes hideous mud.
For thing like this as broad brush approach I like to look as other applications of the technology in industry.
Belts are widely used but thinking about it they are always well protected. Chains too well protected but in generally dirty environments. Also thinking about the chains I have seen they tend to be used in more "snatchy" applications. That may be just confirmation bias though, would be good to know the numbers. Of course this is all subject to my own experience which has been some oil, some factories and some agriculture, all be it a long way from the latest big money machinery, so there may well be plenty of applications in dirty real world applications.
After watching the video above it seems to be more about how stiff the rear triangle is rather than how muddy the terrain is