This worries me (belt drive)

[dazco]

The 1600 has belt drive. there are issues that i'm worried about and maybe someone here has some answers. First, installing a new belt is going to be a major job because the swingarm has to come off of this monster bike, and i really don't want to hoist what will surely be a 60050 Lb bike on a cheesy little lift then remove a ton of weight (huge rear wheel/tire and swingarm) from the rear for fear the bike will tip forward. Removing the wheel alone from my 540 Lb speedy is bad enough. So has anyone done this? Any thoughts? I read somewhere it costs a fortune for the belt and the install. Someone i think quoted something like $600 for a HD.

Also, what about lifespan? unless these things last 100k miles the cost is too darn high. For $600 i can install about 4 chains. How long do they last and what is the chance of a rock or such snapping one? One good thing i noticed about the 1600 is it seems to have guards that cover much of the belt, so thats good.

Finally, when you remove the rear wheel for a new tire, is it fairly simple to get the belt adjusted right on re-install? And how hard is it to remove and reinstall a wheel with belt drive? I ask because i read that if not adjusted very well they can snap.

Wish they'd have used a chain on this darn bike !

 

[DaveM]

I have never been very keen on a belt drive on a bike. Now some say they outlast a chain by miles. However my problem besides what you have listed above is getting a belt. I can basically walk into any bike shop and get a replacement chain right there. However a belt will be a different story. I think I would have rather seen a shaft drive to a belt on this bike

 

[CarlS]

I have never owned a bike with a belt drive; but I ride with lots of folks who have them. I have never heard anyone I know complain about a belt drive and that includes some mighty serious riders of all kinds of bikes. Belts last longer than chains and are quieter. Chains are certainly better off road and are a touch more efficient. Shaft drives are less maintenance (sometimes) and whole lot more expensive when there is repair to be done. A belt drive is nothing to fear or worry about. Kenny Nichols converted his Speedmaster to a belt drive and it is working fine and super quiet.

 

[Dilligaf]

I prefer belt drive. After a slight initial stretch there is no regular adjusting required. Todays belts should last 100K - 200K or more for many folks that is a bikes lifetime. They are quiet, almost as efficient as a chain and don't add the weight of a shaft drive system.

 

[DaveM]

I must admit being quite does not really matter to me. I would be more worried about not having anyplace to get it fixed if I broke down on a trip. Remember our Triumph dealers are very few plus the Harley dealers here are even less and these would be the only places that I would think could fix a problem for you.

 

[dazco]

That was one of my other concerns i didn't mention. But yes, i would worry about being a few hundred miles from home and not being able to find one. I also fear another thing.....i don't know of any other bike with as much power that has a belt. Granted we don't know it's specs yet, but i think it's safe to say it will be around 100 HP with about the same amount in torque. Some have said up to 120 HP. Most bike with such power are either sportbikes which have chains, or bikes with shaft. I don't doubt their reliability, but IF something happens it could be a bad scene. If it feels normal, lasts for 100k, and has nearly no chance of breaking, i suppose i'd be happy about it. i just don't know for sure. I wonder if it would be possible to change it over to chain drive.

 

[DaveM]

Funny I was thinking about a chain conversion as this is what I would go for if I did purchase the bike. I like my bikes that have chains

 

[grandpaul]

There are plenty of big-inch HDs with hot rod stage-whatever kits pumping out upwards of 100HP and running it through a belt drive rear end. No worries.

 

[dazco]

Theres a guy here at work who has 4 harleys with belts and i just asked him what he thought. he said he's got almost 100k on one of them and that neither he nor anyone he knows ever had a belt go bad or even wear out. he also said the technology has improved so much that on the newer ones than his the belts have been changed to 1/2 the width ! he said from 1-1/4" to 3/4" and that they are just as strong due to the advancements made. I asked why not leave them the same width and have them twice as strong and apparently it's to have bigger rear wheel/tires. he's completely sold on them obviously. Guess my worries are foolish.

 

[DaveM]

I still like a chain, thanks BUT then again I also like a leather jacket :y18:

 

[dazco]

Well, i must say i have been convinced. I would much prefer a belt if it 1)-never breaks, 2)-almost never needs adjustment, 3)-is easy enough to remove wheel for tire change and put pack in correct adjustment. If those are all true, and they seem to be, why not go for maintenance free and quiet? I wasn't against the different technology than a chain, i just couldn't imagine they were that reliable and maintenance free, even tho everything including a trillion harleys with belt point that way. Apparently they are nearly perfect so i'm fine with it. And with this bike i'm surely not going to need to change the gearing.....6 speeds and 100+ HP and torque around the same, i'm sure it won't be geared too low and that kind of power will pull some tall gearing. But enough of this.....bring it on....i want it now !!!!

 

[CarlS]

Dave, if you bought a bike with a belt drive, I can guarantee that you would not want to convert to chain drive unless you were planning to do some serious off road stuff. If a shop can change a chain, they can change a belt.

 

[dazco]

True, and considering they seem to go forever, or at least 100k, the cost is no worse. It's like buying 4 chains, but instead of buying them every 25k you buy one every 100k or more. I never even put that many miles on any one of my bikes 1 So I'm starting to actually like this idea.

now heres another thing i learned at NTBF about the 1600....the cylinders and case are all one piece ! Now before you get all worked up like i did when it forst was pointed out to me there, apparently the bonnie and derivatives are the only triumph ever made by the reincarnated company that has removable cylinders. the rest are all one piece, or "monoblock". I had a bit of a discussion about this there and thats what i was told. my response was that sonce we know triumph will be offering a 1700 kit for the 1600, how in gods name can they expect to sell any of them if the cases must be split and crank removed to install pistons?! No one had an answer for this, but if anyone here does please explain it to me. Because i know triumph will charge at lease 2 if not 3 grand to do this not even counting the parts. So i'd wager the total cost would be about1/4 to 1/3 of the cost of the bike itself just to have another 100cc and probably a bit higher compression ! And how many owners do you think would have the balls to drop the engine, split the cases and install the kit? nearly zero i'd estimate. So yeah, i don't get it.

 

[CarlS]

Who was the source at NTBF? If it was Spyglass, he is reliable.

 

[dazco]

No source as such, just someone noticing the pics look like it's one piece. if you mean the source about all but the twins being one piece case/block, it was someone called triman57.

 

[CarlS]

I'll check it out. Thank you, Sir.

 

[DaveM]

I am starting to think that maybe this bike is too different for me :silent:

 

[Stagger Lee]

Come on guys a belt is great

I had one on a bike nearly 30 years ago (Kawasaki) and it was great, no adjustment - no cleaning - no worries. I have however been the pilot of a honda cbx750 when the chain snapped at over 80mph - it made a friggen scary mess of my bike (and my underpants) and for many years I refused to own a chain driven bike again.

They even have belt drive 'off' road bikes now. And changing a belt is just as easy as changing one of the new sealed chains.

this bike with belt drive and ABS will be a winner

 

[RAFIKI]

I asked this question whilst I was over at the conf and was told that the belt should last in excess of 80 000 kms.I can't see the running costs being high .

 

[DaveM]

Well that sounds good. I think it is just so different to what I am used to. I have only had chain or shaft on my bikes :y115: