If that belt Is wider than the chain, I think you will have a clearance Issue with the frame tube near the chain slider.
If that belt Is wider than the chain, I think you will have a clearance Issue with the frame tube near the chain slider.
83 ATC 60-R Cr60 converted with Zinger parts.
83 ATC 70.
83 Tri zinger
ATC 85-R Cr85 engine on shortened 86-R frame.
ATC450AF
86 310-R Drag racer
440 snowmobile powered custom built.
87 Cr 500 Converted to Drag racer
#1 - FACT! chain and sprocket produces the least friction and drag of any of the 3 most common final drive systems (chain, belt , shaft)
#2 - You have twice mentioned Harley - borrowing any technology or ideas from Harley is pretty moot - at least in the Off Road world. Harley has not Built anything off road since AMF and some italian company helped them in the early 70s with a trouble plagued street and trail bike.
#3 - As already mentioned you will be adding weight to your machine doing this - I guess if you wanna be different - more power to you - but I don't see anything good coming from it.
RIP - Yamahondaman!! You will never be forgotten!
RIP - Sam Brehm!! Gone but NEVER forgotten!
RIP - Sandpuppi101 - You will live on in my mind - I miss you friend!
hey Tim ... you wouldn't want a belt to slip with this !!!![]()
"07" DR650 Suzuki Dual Sport
I personally have NEVER had a problem with a PROPERLY maintained chain. Ive raced for over 8 years now and rode since I was 4. Worked on all sorts of machines, rode most too, never had a problem.
I'm not sure on this, but wouldn't a belt be a lot pickier on the tension? I would personally think it would slip or snap unless it stayed at the perfect tension. When the swingarm on a trike goes up and down, the chain gets looser and tighter (because the swingarm bolt is not lined up with the output shaft). I'm not too sure a belt would like that.
Tim's right about the less friction on a chain. Like also stated, if you got a rock wedged in there, your screwed. If you went over some sharp rocks and sliced the belt, it will break, and your screwed. Some 4x4 quads have belts for there tranny, and when water gets in there, they slip like a mofo. Just think all the crap that will get on that belt. So what if it weighs less, its not going to take the abuse a chain can take. And its not a Harley. Try taking belt driven Harley through mud, rocks, all that crap, it wont fair so well. Not a good idea IMO. But if you want to try it, more power to you. Just my .02
TF 07,08,09,10,11,12,13,14!
Raffa's IceFest 08, 09, 10,11,13!
SAY IT!!!!!BUD LIGHTS AND RED LIGHTS!!!!!!
Another problem I see is the front pulley. I would think that it would need to be a larger diameter than the front sprocket because a belt wouldn't flex as easy as a chain. a bigger front pulley would mean an enormous rear pully and less ground clearance. Also, since the pulleys would have to be so large I doubt the weight savings would be very much.
belt will be much more finicky.
has to have perfect tension at all times. because suspension travel changes the distance between the puleys, a chain tensioner would be needed. this means more routes for the belt, and more chances for it to pop off. and, when the puley's teeth become clogged with mud, the belt will just slip all day long, which means the system would have to be enclosed.
a rock may not break the belt, but it will certainly knock the belt off the pulley.
i dont know where your buying chains from, but heavy duty belts, especially long ones such as the one this project would need, are expensive. in the end, i think the belt system would cost more, after making the components ad all future maintenance.
he is right on the chain = least drag.
i have built many moving contraptions, and i have tried all 3 systems. the gear system tends to make the most drag unless everything is 100% perfect, such as in a transmission, then it ties with belt drive.
that, and every robot we ever built in school, the drive wheels were always chain and sprocket. not because we thought it was the best, but because groups of engineers mentoring our project told us that.
yes, i know engineers suck, but the guys mentoring our projects were very pleasant, informative, 100% opposite of teemgeek you will ever meet.
and besides, if a final belt drive was in fact better, dont you think it would have been implemented by now by a big atv company?
wait......they have been......some of the old yamaha PW50 dirt bikes were belt. the belt was enclosed so tight nothing could get to it. and, if im not mistaken, those didnt last long, and never were implemented on bigger bikes.
for a project to do something different and sand out, go for it.
if you are looking for a performance gain, or trying to come up with something better than a chain drive, you are wasting your time.
and, as for weight, the....pound? you will save in all of this, just only ever fill your fuel tank 3/4full, and you have already saved more weight.
or get lighter boots. or aluminum wheels. plastic tank prolly lighter. or, just toss your airbox lid. you will save a pound and gain a little performance.
Last edited by 300rman; 03-19-2008 at 12:37 AM.
i pulled this off a google search. i guess its up in the air. i really think the real benefit would be for someone in the dunes
http://www.sportbikers.net/forums/sh...ad.php?t=10847
Last edited by bigpimpin; 03-19-2008 at 12:43 AM.
'02 Honda 416ex - A seasoned blend of 11 herbs and spices
'04 Honda Recon - The yard machine and snow plow
'88 Honda CR250R - Another chapter in my torrid all terrain affair