You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Belt drives where forecast by the mags to be the next great thing(marketing ploy) what happened to them, only ever seen one.
Cutaway saddles with a slot or groove down the middle,
Those single wheel cycle trailers,
and lots more stuff that seems to not be on the market anymore.
They were?
Belt drives are either single speed or hub-geared - they've not takn the world over either.
Spares are expensive and they DO wear out.
Plenty saddles with a groove.
Single-wheel trailers...you need to ask?
I've got two split saddles.
you see them more on road bikes.
A reasonable number of belt drive things about - biggest reason they're not more common is probably because they need a special frame.
Saddles? Dunno - most of that cutaway nonsense was fashion.
Single wheel trailers? Still do lots of them, for people who go serious touring.
Every saddle I have owned over the past 10 years has a cut away, and as for belt drives, you are looking in the wrong place, billions of them out there just probably not where you are.
as for belt drives, you are looking in the wrong place, billions of them out there just probably not where you are.
I've only ever seen one at a bike show. Where have you seen them?
We sell a few. Not quite billions though 🙂
For the singlewheel trailer, was reading about them yesterday on crazyguyonabike, they are available from [url= http://www.extrawheel.com/ ]Extrawheel[/url]
BOB Yaks are still around and still great. You get scary tank slappers on flexy frames though.
shermer75 - Member
...I've only ever seen one at a bike show. Where have you seen them?
Here
[url= http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5202/5279285025_7dc5418c20.jp g" target="_blank">
here
[url= http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3387/4606888711_9ca52cc4e4.jp g" target="_blank">
and here
[url= http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4019/4576337920_70ca5f75da.jp g" target="_blank">
I have others dating back 20 odd years, but no pics (pre digital camera).
The problem is the belt system is expensive compared to a chain. You need E-stays or a rear end that can be split to get the belt through, and many frames simply don't have enough lateral stiffness in the chainstays.
Benefits are silence and cleanliness, but you can achieve that with a fully enclosed chain.
Well that's 3 nearly reached our first billion.
They're out there but as it's an expensive outlay to get started it's not really taken off, which is how the mags put it if I remember rightly.
I would love to convert my fortitude to belt drive, and may do so at some stage, but the cost of converting a frame is rather high.
@epicycle Is that a conversion you have done on that on one? I was thinking of a S&S coupler, but that looks like simpler.
MSP - Member
@epicycle Is that a conversion you have done on that on one? I was thinking of a S&S coupler, but that looks like simpler.
They are all conversions. The On-One is dead simple to do and has a stiff enough chainstay. Two of the bikes are Magic Ratios which is tricky to set up with a belt.
I agree with Drac. It's not going to take off until the components are equivalently priced to a chain set up and we finish our love affair with the derailleur. The Gates system uses proprietary parts not available from other suppliers so a price drop is probably not in our future.
I've done enough to prove the concept to myself and won't be doing anything further until pricing improves.
People stopped using them when they realised they still wear out but are less efficient than a chain. Only real use is city bikes so you don't get out on your trousers.
fourbanger - Member
People stopped using them when they realised they still wear out but are less efficient than a chain. Only real use is city bikes so you don't get out on your trousers.
City type bikes are a much bigger market than our sports based one in most countries.
Less efficient than a chain? I have never heard that before, what causes this inefficiency?
My use would be for my commuter/touring, for touring I wouldn't really want to lose any efficiency for touring but wouldn't be too worried about a small deficit for commuting.
I wonder if that would also be comparing brand spanking new set-ups. I imagine one of the advantages of belt drive is it stays closer to that crisp new feeling for much longer.
Less efficient than a chain? I have never heard that before, what causes this inefficiency?
It takes energy to flex the belt, and squidge the belt teeth on and off the sprockets. Chains really are very, very efficient. A belt could be 95% efficient and it would still have 5x as much drag as a chain.
It takes energy to flex the belt, and squidge the belt teeth on and off the sprockets
I am struggling to imagine that would be any worse than a chain after a few weeks use, unless the belt wasn't set up properly in the first place.
The real innovation with chains - the really clever bit - was the invention of the roller chain. This means each chain link rolls on and off the teeth instead of sliding.
Whereas belt teeth slide - and it's rubber sliding not steel.
The advantage is a belt will have the same drag no matter what, whereas a chain needs lubrication to keep it's low drag.
Hello!
<waves>
😀
[url= http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8154/7250974338_54a3110dbb_b.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/ir_bandito/7250974338/ ]DSC_0283[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/ir_bandito/ ]ir_bandito[/url], on Flickr
(but you knew that was coming didn't you?)
Presently looking into another one too.
It takes energy to flex the belt, and squidge the belt teeth on and off the sprockets.
Have you ridden one? I notice a bit of squidge from the suspension, but the belt is a pure joy to use.
A belt could be 95% efficient and it would still have 5x as much drag as a chain.
Is a chain 99% efficient? that's what you're saying.
...Is a chain 99% efficient?
er, yes.
(if it's clean and oiled)
Well according to this, a belt drive is 1 watt less efficient than a chain normally and becomes more efficient when the whole workload is above 208 watts.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/chain-drive-or-belt-drive-whos-faster
So completely negligible then, and I would be willing to bet results would probably swing further in favour of the belt drive, under a normal imperfect maintenance regime that most follow for their drive chain.
guy in work has one of these for commuting and he loves it no need to worry about cleaning the chain in the filthy weather lately
[img] 
[/img]
@epicyclo is that first pic an Al-mega? I've always thought e-stays make lots of sense for belt drives.
I like the idea of a belt driven SS but not enough to go out of my way or budget to own one...
That silver bike is stunning.. bloody love that 😀
Whatdatden?
It's the only kinda bike I see belt drives working propers like.
Back to the broader topic - HammerSchmidt? Seemed to rise and fall very quickly!
cookeaa - Member
@epicyclo is that first pic an Al-mega?
bikebouy - Member
...That silver bike is stunning.. bloody love that
Whatdatden?
Both are cheap bargain frames from bankrupt-bikes on eBay. The Silver one is actually rather nice to ride, it may have been a Barracuda frame in a previous life.
I have no idea what the E-stay bike was originally. It did come with a 1 ¼" fork originally which may mean something to someone. I've adapted it to take a 1 ?"
Back to the broader topic - HammerSchmidt? Seemed to rise and fall very quickly!
Because it was a heavy, expensive, non-working copy of a Schlumpf drive 😉
Is a chain 99% efficient? that's what you're saying.
Yes - or more, if new and oiled. In the real world you probably won't notice the extra drag from a belt, but that doesn't mean it's not there.
That e-stay bike looks familiar, I got a bunch of them from a distributor that was closing down, never worked out who made it.
I have a feeling that worrying about belt/chain drag is a bit like worrying about the drag of the bearings in your pedals- you can feel it in the right conditions but it's irrelevant when riding.
But the main reason for belts is that they're cool looking!
Alpinestars Al-Mega frames are/were 1.25" headset, but the dropouts don't look right for one of those.
But the main reason for belts is that they're cool looking!
That's why i did it!
The silence is fantastic, until you freewheel when the Hope Trials freehub wakes everyone up
Alpinestars Al-Mega frames are/were 1.25" headset, but the dropouts don't look right for one of those.
Yes, I had an Alpinestars, and it was quite different.
epicycle - initially I thought it was a Funk but the rear drop outs make it something different, shame the Funks are nice rare and expensive.. I have one. 😉 Bigfoot did some raised stay but cant recall what they looked like. Maybe its one of these :
[url= http://forums.mtbr.com/vintage-retro-classic/1991-ellison-e-stay-bike-made-texas-680437.html ]Ellison [/url]
I have no idea what the E-stay bike was originally. It did come with a 1 ¼" fork originally which may mean something to someone. I've adapted it to take a 1 ?"
I thought Funk too initially.
you see them more on road bikes.
Also on a MTB the slot is another avenue for wet mud to find your backside, not to mention double the chances of catching on your shorts while descending.
Yes - (a chain is 99% efficient) or more, if new and oiled. In the real world you probably won't notice the extra drag from a belt, but that doesn't mean it's not there.
😆 Brilliant. Can you back this up, Einstein? I'm intrigued where this figure comes from.
Brilliant. Can you back this up, Einstein? I'm intrigued where this figure comes from.
A big thick textbook called Bicycling Science - loads of tables, but one relevant one gives efficiencies of a Deore LX drivetrain (i.e. not just the chain) - max efficiency is 99%.
Interestingly it drops dramatically with increasing gear ratios - down to 88% when running 42-11. But that's a factor of the sprocket interface not the chain itself, so would equally affect belt drives.
Interestingly it drops dramatically with increasing gear ratios - down to 88% when running 42-11. But that's a factor of the sprocket interface not the chain itself, so would equally affect belt drives.
That's not to do with the chainline then? Because I'd expect that to effect things too.
This chain was a smidge over 98% efficient when installed.
[url= http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7384/10994815543_1cebd0f3cd_b.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/21556621@N06/10994815543/ ]100_0245[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/21556621@N06/ ]pictonroad[/url], on Flickr
[url= http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2838/10994815513_2dc4f715fb.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/21556621@N06/10994815513/ ]WT4Z5106[1][/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/21556621@N06/ ]pictonroad[/url], on Flickr
however, I couldn't get a quick link in my pack, oh, and singlespeed only.
OK, more than 99% efficient may be a little far-fetched, but 98% seems to be banded about quite a bit:
http://www.jhu.edu/news_info/news/home99/aug99/bike.html
http://cozybeehive.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/factors-affecting-bicycle-transmission.html
And it looks like chainline is a factor too.
Thanks for them SuperSessions9_2.
So I semi-eat my mocking hat. 😉
That's not to do with the chainline then? Because I'd expect that to effect things too.
It affects things a bit - but the real problem is the bend as the chain goes on and off the sprockets. A smaller sprocket means the link has to bend further.