Unchain My Bike... Or So I Thought...

Unchain my bike... or so I thought...

Hans Renold is credited with inventing roller chain in 1880... but

here we are 127 years later and bikes are still laboring under a

steely... heavy... clanky... messy... chain... Mercy me chains are a

pain... belts spell relief... and so my belt drive conversion starts with an

engineering drawing...

Gates Poly Chain comes in 3 belt sizes... 14mm pitch is what HD

employs on their cruisers... 8mm is what I used on the VF500

Belt-0-Ceptor... 11mm is the little known in between belt but only

comes in lengths of 155T and 172T... I need 166T to make it work on

Mr.RC45...

I started with a Buell 11mm pitch sprockets and belt... a 30T up

front and 70T out back... they were machined them to fit Mr.RC45...

so far so good

Buell's steel 30T 11mm spocket installed on the RC45 primary shaft...

[image: gallery_3131_51_45790.jpg]

Buell's aluminum 72T 11mm sprocket installed on the RC45 axle...

Ideally I needed 628mm between centers as evident with Mr.RC45's 17T

43T 110 links of chain prove to show...

But when I added the Buell 30T 72T 155T setup it measured 561mm

between centers... 67mm too short...

Next I ordered a 172 tooth belt from BMW but with the Buell sprockets

the BMW belt was 664mm between centers... 36mm too long...

Maybe if I machine my own 76T sprocket so I started with a 20lb block

of 7075 T6 Aluminum...

[image: gallery_3131_51_62149.jpg]

After the teeth were cut by RCD Engineering the block was down to 10

lbs at this stage...

After milling the spokes using only hand eye coordination it was down

to 1 lb 13 oz...

Now with the Buell 30T sprocket 172T BMW belt and 76T home made

sprocket the distance between centers was 651mm... 23mm too long...

because of the single sided swing arm I limited to 20mm adjustment so

I knew it would be close... how close??? less than 3mm or .118

thousands of an inch separates success from failure...

I have failed to unchain Mr.RC45... not that I didn't come close... I

came within 3mm of enjoying a light weight... maintenance free...

snatch free... lubeless belt drive system... it all came down to

finding the right number of teeth in a 11mm pitch belt... and so with

only 2 bikes in the world that employ the 11mm pitch belt (2003 Buell

and the 2007 BMW 800) I have to wait for a 3rd bike to employ the

little known 11mm pitch Poly Chain Belt...

So in conclusion after $1000 dollars in parts and a custom 7075 T6

aluminum sprocket consuming over 30 days worth of machining... I have

NO joy to report... in fact I'm devastated and sad... not to mention

Gates Rubber wants $65K for the mold of a custom 166T 11mm pitch belt...

Man that's alot of money for nothing. But you do have some pretty parts there, maybe use them as home decorations?

Would it work for any generation of VFR? :idea3:

Gap TrashMan that's alot of money for nothing. But you do have some pretty parts there, maybe use them as home decorations?

It' hard to believe that there isn't something else out there that would work. This might sound dumb, but what about an automotive timing belt from a single overhead cam engine?

aww that sprocket you brought to bubbas didnt work? Have you considered a belt tensioner?

HispanicSlammerHave you considered a belt tensioner?

+1 Like Buell uses on all its bikes.

Woooah BLS, you are a man on a mission. Such a shame, you were real close. Emmm, but isn't that (realtively) a lot of dough to be throwing around wantonly??

Now you've gone and done it, one can cheat and use your figures to analyse. Just thinking aloud here, but... by adding 4 teeth you've shortened the distance between centres by 13 mm. So, that roughly translates to shortening the distance 'tween centres by 3.25 mm per tooth. In hindsight we now know you needed to shorten that by at least 3 mm more, to be within the 20 mm tolerance you mention (although I take it the more the better), so in rough theory you need one more tooth. Hmmmm

If we suppose that the ratio between the increase in radius and the number of teeth is constant or a direct relationship, (something tells me it isn't quite, because of the angular math due to the belt), but supposing it were, you would only need one (1) more tooth, or a 77-T sprocket. But like I said, that's too rough so, one could overshoot to be sure and increase it to two (2) more teeth. So that would be a 78-T sprocket instead. In terms of reducing that distance, more teeth is better, buuuuut..... not so for your gearing...

I don't know in real terms how that would affect the power output at the wheel, (compared to stock) that is beyond me... but you've already gone up 4 teeth on the original idea of the Buell rear sprocket which, if you chose the Buell one for a reason... means you're getting well away from that reasoning if you go up a whole 6 teeth...

OK, computing some more math into it to double check things, I'm fairly certain that you would need just 2 more teeth. It comes down to the error margin....

If I calculate the circumference (and thus the radius) of the sprocket based on the distance between teeth of 0.433 (this is rough math) I get a discrepancy of 1.8 mm from your 13 mm difference between centres (prolly due to the angular math the belt supposes, which I did not apply). In other words only 11.2 mm, which would imply 2.8 mm per tooth. which as I said is not quite enough, so you factor in good old down on the farm common sense and go up 2 Teeth!!!

:idea3: :goofy:

Got a money back guarantee on that sprocket??? :goofy: :goofy:

Any math graduates or professors confirm??? I know my calculations are missing a couple of minor factors but I reckon they're negligible enough... jeez, if you're going to cut out your spokes by eye!!! :goofy: :goofy:

Then again, HS' idea might save you money and it's such a small difference it just might work... talk to Toro1... he rigged up a tensioner on his blower. I reckon it'll be cheaper, but you've also got to calculate the specs for fabbing that and find a suitable mounting point and means... unless Toro1's fits already (that would be too much to ask) ... maybe one (1) more tooth AND a tensioner... to save face on the power at the wheel issue...

Do I make sense??

Good luck, we're all anxious to see it work :goofy: :goofy: :goofy:

(I'm gunna regret posting this...)

Man Larry, as close as you are to having this thing licked, you really should take a long hard look at buell's tensioners. I think it, or something very similar, would work to take up the little bit of slack.

By the way, that machined rear sprocket looks HAWT!

Larry,

OK, critical distance is sprocket to sprocket on the RC45? Is this critical distance the same on RC45, RC30, VFR750, VFR800?

Or a tensioner?

Just an idea.

Larry

VFRrider

Guys, look at the pics. Belt might not clear the swingarm under tension. sad.gif

BusyLittleShopto 1 lb 13 oz...

m pitch belt...

I really respect custom machine work.

I grew up and worked in a prototype machine shop, my dad owned it. Custom one off, or small run, stuff for the fledging space program made out of aluminum, magnesium and titanium. My job was to fly cut on a mill the exotic materials down to size. I never developed the skill those great machinists had on the lathes that worked for my dad. The reason why; when I turned 16 yrs old, old enough for a real job, I left his shop and became a lifeguard. The girls were better look’n than the machinist and the girls did not wear much :thumbsup: I regret that decision now, sort of :idea3:

Your work is stunning :thumbsup:

Isn't a tensioner required if the swingarm pivot and countershaft sprockets aren't on the same axis, anyway? With any kind of power, it seems like you couldn't allow much variation in belt tension due to swingarm movement. I suppose you might get away with it if the countershaft sprocket is quite close to the swingarm pivot, and in line with the swingarm near the center of travel. Even with my Hawk GT, when I added a longer rear shock, I also added a chain roller under swingarm pivot to help with the changes in chain tension due to the relatively higher pivot location. If your drawing is accurate, it'd be really easy to determine the change in distance between the sprockets through the range of travel by just drawing an arc. Have you done that?

Weren't there some early reports of belt problems with the new Buell 1125? What was that about? Wider belt needed?

:idea3: You could just buy a Buell. Better bike, anyway. :P

oyamaWould it work for any generation of VFR? :idea3:

I don't think this current setup will work on any other VFR...

It's a stretch, but you might check out these guys.

http://www.econobelt.com/

They helped me out bigtime, (But on a different application).

Why don't you buy a Uly and park the RC45?

HispanicSlammeraww that sprocket you brought to bubbas didnt work? Have you considered a belt tensioner?

Hiya HS... yep they are the same sprocket I brought to Bubbas

last year in July and it don't work...

I already thought about rollers... but the BMW belt is

kind of rubbery whereas the Buell belt is more plastic... the

different being you can run a roller against Buell belt but not

against the BMW belt without taking the life out of it... besides I

don't think I have the room on Mr.RC45 dense packaging...

Larry, I gotta say, where there is a will, there's a relative... err, uh, there's a way. :thumbsup:

You know I dont quite understand both the buell and the bmw employ and idler pully? With a grand already sunk into this I think I would find a way to make it work

I really wanted to go down this route when I had a VFR so have followed every posting on this topic.

Bummer man that it didn't work out as you hoped.

Is it impossible to add a small tensioner running on the lower slack side of the BMW belt on the INSIDE of the belt? Obviously it will have to be a toothed pulley. Your observation that the BMW belt is soft would not apply to the inner toothed side since that is intended to run over pulleys. There would be very little wrap around the tensioner pulley since you are already so close to the allowable range. It would, as Fallzboater, & other, say compensate for the changing center distance as the wheel moves.

The 30 + 76 combination gives a ratio of 2.533 which is very close to the original 2.529 that the standard 17 + 43 gives so it really would be great if you could make it work.

I admire your manual milling work tremendously.

SEBSPEEDGuys, look at the pics. Belt might not clear the swingarm under tension. sad.gif

The Buell sprocket (3rd photo) seems to come real close to the swingarm!! So I'm not sure if you've placed the custom-made one to check, but with 4 more teeth it must be getting close to touching... unless the photo is deceiving...

Auspañol

SEBSPEEDGuys, look at the pics. Belt might not clear the swingarm under tension. sad.gif

The Buell sprocket (3rd photo) seems to come real close to the swingarm!! So I'm not sure if you've placed the custom-made one to check, but with 4 more teeth it must be getting close to touching... unless the photo is deceiving...

Hopefully Larry is trying to obtain his required measurement with the axle & hub oriented as far forward as possible... in the case that the belt doesn't stretch, he'll have the shortest wheelbase possible.

That'll allow him to gain a couple mm by moving the eccentric...

From working on my supercharger project and designing Harley open primary belt drives, I know how difficult this process is. My question is this -- how did you figure out the ideal center distance for the 30T/76T combo? Tensioning is so key with these drives, and after talking to Gates engineers several times, I know that they almost never recommend fixed center distances.

The pitch length of the 172T belt is 74.488" and the pitch length of your 30T/76T combo with a center distance of 25.630" (651mm) is 74.605", thus you must be preloading the belt a certain amount. Gates has special formulas for computing the tension -- did you use these in determining the center distance?

The part that bugs me about the belt drive is the varying tension in the belt as the suspension moves up and down. I'm guessing most manufacturers that do this set the tension to be ideal when an 1xx-lb. rider is on the bike, and any time the suspension moves, it varies slightly from this ideal figure. I also believe that Buell uses a spring loaded belt tensioner on their bikes, located on the slack side of the belt (which can be seen here, and the patent is here). I know Gates does not recommend using outside idlers on ribbed surface Poly Chain belts, so I'm not sure how Harley gets away with this one. They also do not recommend using spring loaded tensioners.

Anyway, here is the actual PolyChain manual. Pertinent engineering data begins on page 40. If you have not yet contacted Gates, I suggest you do. It's a pain to get a hold of their engineers, but once you do, they know their stuff (I can personally recommend Jack Timmerman).

Best of luck, as you don't need to give up hope yet. :thumbsup:

AuspañolEmmm, but isn't that (realtively) a lot of dough to be throwing around wantonly??

Auspanol...... emmmmm, you are married right? so you should know all about wantonly..... :P

BLS,

you got the cash to blow, blow it.

the last jacket you will wear has no pockets......

toro1From working on my supercharger project and designing Harley open primary belt drives, I know how difficult this process is. My question is this -- how did you figure out the ideal center distance for the 30T/76T combo?

Anyway, here is the actual PolyChain manual. Pertinent engineering data begins on page 40. If you have not yet contacted Gates, I suggest you do. It's a pain to get a hold of their engineers, but once you do, they know their stuff (I can personally recommend Jack Timmerman).

Best of luck, as you don't need to give up hope yet. :thumbsup:

Thanks for the questions Toro...

I stretched them out and measured the centers of the 110 links of

chain and the 17/43 sprocket on the milling table... then I stretch

and tensioned the belts and measured their centers... I also produce a

full scale engineering drawing as a second opinion... it would be nice if

Honda would release the engineering drawings to the RC45...

I've been working with Gate's Engineers since 1989 with my first belt

drive project... thanks but I have the engineering manuals and Mr.

Timmerman name sounds familiar...

I have yet to see any problem... however complicated... which when you

think about it all the time... did not become solved... in short I never give up...

I've even worked out a solution to run belts and change over all

gearing... if I change the gear on the crank and the gear on the

clutch that would afford overall gear ratio change without upsetting

ride height or belt tension... trick no???

[image: BeltCloseUp.jpg]

Is there a problem with simply adding a roller idler pulley, or is this a preference to try to not run one.............. +1.gif

Is there a problem with simply adding a roller idler pulley, or is this a preference to try to not run one.............. http://www.vfrdiscus...tyle_emoticons/default/+1.gif

You know I dont quite understand both the buell and the bmw employ and idler pully? With a grand already sunk into this I think I would find a way to make it work

gll429

[image: IMG00962.jpg]

[image: IMG00964.jpg]

2 different set ups.. one with the belt on top of roller.. no teeth needed...

the other with the belt under the roller teeth may be wanted.....

Only a goober would miss the part in my thread about rollers...

VFRD................ where u learn something new every day..............

Goober may refer to:

The peanut

Goobers, a brand name of chocolate-coated peanut

Goober (brand), a food product combining peanut butter and fruit preserves

Goober, a fictional dog in the 1970s animated series Goober and the Ghost Chasers

You're not using your magnesium swingarm for this are you? I probably wouldn't want to do any drilling to that system.

Dutchy

VFRD................ where u learn something new every day..............

Goober may refer to:

The peanut

Goobers, a brand name of chocolate-coated peanut

Goober (brand), a food product combining peanut butter and fruit preserves

Goober, a fictional dog in the 1970s animated series Goober and the Ghost Chasers

here is a little piece of "americana" for you too....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZeacmVyxrA

BusyLittleShop

Only a goober would miss the part in my thread about rollers...

i didn't miss it.

you said no room... this thing out of TI, would be small and would fit there with out hitting anything..

then you can use a long belt made for the sportster.

gll429

[

i didn't miss it.

you said no room... this thing out of TI, would be small and would fit there with out hitting anything..

then you can use a long belt made for the sportster.

No room means that Gates engineering recommends that the smallest

idler pulley is 4in because belt life would be considerably shorten if

it defected by any smaller of a pulley... that especially means the

skate broad wheel spring loaded John Deer combine part you dreamed up...

BusyLittleShop

gll429

[

i didn't miss it.

you said no room... this thing out of TI, would be small and would fit there with out hitting anything..

then you can use a long belt made for the sportster.

No room means that Gates engineering recommends that the smallest

idler pulley is 4in because belt life would be considerably shorten if

it defected by any smaller of a pulley... that especially means the

skate broad wheel spring loaded John Deer combine part you dreamed up...

well, i know my set up works, as it was tested on a fixed axle bike... i have no clue how long the belt lasted though.. sorry

gll429

well, i know my set up works, as it was tested on a fixed axle bike... i have no clue how long the belt lasted though.. sorry

No problem... merely working and engineered correctly to last are

entirely two different objectives...

Quit being a dick Larry.

BusyLittleShop

gll429

well, i know my set up works, as it was tested on a fixed axle bike... i have no clue how long the belt lasted though.. sorry

No problem... merely working and engineered correctly to last are

entirely two different objectives...

your right..

your bike doesnt have a belt.. but my little gizmo is on a street legal 185hp nitro-methane drag bike.. the "roller" is just a set of bearing and a TI sleeve.

just because Gates says something, doesnt make it gospel :fing02:

you spent all that time making the parts but never tried a tiny roller.. what the worst that can happen? you put a few thousand miles on a belt that should get 20? inspect your belt every ride then make a decision for yourself .

gll429

just because Gates says something, doesnt make it gospel :fing02:

True. As long as the belt lasts 5k to 10k miles I don't see a problem. Well, other than it looks hideous on an RC45, but that's just my personal opinion.

its late.. i am buzzed.. but have a simple idea..

if you want to follow gates arc of a 4inch pulley do so.. with a bunch of smaller rollers.. this was drawn with a 5 inch pulley.. and exaggerated belt angle

so yeah.. add a piece of tractor to your bike..

[image: IMG00984.jpg]

or you could buy the 28 or 29 tooth front pulley and make a SMALLER rear pulley and get the right leangth you need. :fing02:

gll429

just because Gates says something, doesnt make it gospel :fing02:

It's gospel... the Gates belt is too short...

gll429

its late.. i am buzzed.. but have a simple idea..

if you want to follow gates arc of a 4inch pulley do so.. with a bunch of smaller rollers.. this was drawn with a 5 inch pulley.. and exaggerated belt angle

so yeah.. add a piece of tractor to your bike..

[image: IMG00984.jpg]

or you could buy the 28 or 29 tooth front pulley and make a SMALLER rear pulley and get the right leangth you need. :fing02:

Thanks for the tractor part... but I already considered rollers... but the belt is still too long...

V4 Rosso

gll429

just because Gates says something, doesnt make it gospel :fing02:

True. As long as the belt lasts 5k to 10k miles I don't see a problem. Well, other than it looks hideous on an RC45, but that's just my personal opinion.

My experience is that a belt will last 3 times longer than chain...

but then again I believe a chain needs replacements at 10K...

You're not the only one who thinks its hideous... in fact the majority

of owners in the RC45 Club have threaten to break into the Busy Little

Shop and rescue Mr.RC45 so he won't suffer the indignation of an belt

mod...

BusyLittleShop

V4 Rosso

gll429

just because Gates says something, doesnt make it gospel :fing02:

True. As long as the belt lasts 5k to 10k miles I don't see a problem. Well, other than it looks hideous on an RC45, but that's just my personal opinion.

My experience is that a belt will last 3 times longer than chain...

but then again I believe a chain needs replacements at 10K...

You're not the only one who thinks its hideous... in fact the majority

of owners in the RC45 Club have threaten to break into the Busy Little

Shop and rescue Mr.RC45 so he won't suffer the indignation of an belt

mod...

Horse nuts, it looks waaaaaaay better than a bunch of chain lube slung all over creation that has to be cleaned once a week!!

BusyLittleShop

But then again I believe a chain needs replacements at 10K...

:laugh:

You're not the only one who thinks its hideous...

Only the jockey wheel. I think a jockey wheel ruins the look of the SSSA. The setup with roller looks much better.

I may be a bit late to the show on this thread .... But have you tried looking into the belt drives used by Yamaha (Star motorcycles)? I believe they use a belt drive on the Raider and the Warrior. It might open some options for you on belt and/or sprocket selection, and a tension system.

I know I'm coming LOOOOONG time after the battle (after the war?) but I am myself highly interested about converting my RC46D to belt drive.

I didn't see in this discussion a word about using a 31T or 32T front pulley? I know it would probably not fit but with some drilling it could ...

For my personal project I am more looking at 8mm pitch 36mm wide belts. the 32T front and 90T rear with 220T belt _should_ fit if I'm right in my measurement and it look likes RCD Engineering is selling everything that I need.

My question is will it be strong enough? The maximum power (let say 110hp) is achieved in first gear at 10500rpm. The primary reduction is 1.939 and the first gear reduction is 2.846 so the 110hp are achieved at 1896rpm. Considering Gates tables I should go for a 53T front pulley or a 62mm wide belt ....

What do you think? Am I wrong somewhere, is there no clue to unchain any VFR? Maybe the 62mm wide belt could fit?

Wow. Nice first post. This should be interesting to watch. Good luck (maybe PM BLS to get his attention?).

Thank you, I'm browsing this forum for 2 years now, lot of information here :) I saw that the VF500 belt-o-ceptor is 70hp with a 8mm pitch belt but I don't know the width but I believe 36mm, maybe less, I'd like to have more informations about this conversion. I may have a little bit of chance also with 14mm pitch 25t front 65t rear but it would be really really tight. I need to take serious measures to be sure that it could fit. Also 25t is small for a 14mm pitch belt, it would probably reduce the lifetime but I can deal with it.

Edit : Ok 65 tooth is too big for the rear ... There exists a 61 tooth that can fit but 61/25 is a too long reduction to be reasonably usable except if I can go for shorter front pulley (22t) but I have some doubt and it will be custom manufactured . So my last chance is the 8mm pitch, it exists in 50mm wide, a little bit weak regarding Gates tables but should be ok.

If you just cracked the mystical VFR belt driven code I'm about to get reeeeeeeeeeeeaaaalyyy excited!!!!!!!!!!!

Keep us in the loop there Nunux59, and welcome!!

Metallican525

If you just cracked the mystical VFR belt driven code I'm about to get reeeeeeeeeeeeaaaalyyy excited!!!!!!!!!!!

Keep us in the loop there Nunux59, and welcome!!

+1 I thought everyone had given up.

Here a German guy selling belt conversion kits. But no Honda's in his range....

http://www.vh-motorradtechnik.de/index.php

Here a German guy selling belt conversion kits.   But no Honda's in his range....
 
 
 
http://www.vh-motorr...ik.de/index.php

Somebody  translate  what  the  price  for Z1000 ?   Looks  like  were  getting  closer.

here ya go http://www.vh-motorr...e-Kits/Kawasaki

The site does have a button top right with a union jack, but if you need more translation or help let me know

here ya go http://www.vh-motorr...e-Kits/Kawasaki

The site does have a button top right with a union jack, but if you need more translation or help let me know

 Thanks  Dutchy,  does  not  show  on  mine .

WOW  $1095  euro  PLUS 19%  tax  PLUS  shipping.  Good  luck  with  that.

Hi Larry,

Sorry to resurrect a sore subject but Gates manufactures an insane number of different belts. Have you contacted their engineering department to see if they have what you need or are you just checking publications regarding motorcycles? Maybe they manufacture the belt but its for a car, industrial equipment, etc?

PM sent to bring Larry`s attention back to this subject and providing a little bit more information.

This post just will not shrivel up and crawl away... :comp13:

5 hours ago, BiKenG

Finally, the figures above support what I read elsewhere that the 5th Gen swingarm is about 25mm shorter than the later models and suggests that the 8th gen length is the same as the 6th Gen. So what about the longer 6/8th Gen swingarm? Would that solve the problem of belt length? It would certainly help.

I realise this doesn't help Larry with his RC45, but it might be the solution for VFR owners who really want the convenience of a belt - and having had a belt drive bike, I REALLY do.
 

Way out of my depth here admittedly, but you say 'this doesn't help Larry'... why not? If it solved the belt length issue, wouldn't swapping a 6th gen swingarm onto a 5th gen be an easy and relatively cheap swap? 

8 minutes ago, adkfinn

Way out of my depth here admittedly, but you say 'this doesn't help Larry'... why not? If it solved the belt length issue, wouldn't swapping a 6th gen swingarm onto a 5th gen be an easy and relatively cheap swap? 

I didn't re-read the entire thread, but I am pretty sure that Larry's bike is a RC45 and not a 5th gen. So the swingarms would not be swappable. Just my best guess.

3 hours ago, marriedman

I didn't re-read the entire thread, but I am pretty sure that Larry's bike is a RC45 and not a 5th gen. So the swingarms would not be swappable. Just my best guess.

Ah yes, you appear to be correct. I missed that Larry mentioned RC45 in his posts, apologies. 

Larry's swing arm is actually an HRC RC45 swing arm, IIRC, but someone with Larry's skills  and connections could probably extend a "standard" RC45 (or RC46?) swing arm if he was so inclined...

Ciao,

10 hours ago, JZH

Larry's swing arm is actually an HRC RC45 swing arm, IIRC, but someone with Larry's skills  and connections could probably extend a "standard" RC45 (or RC46?) swing arm if he was so inclined...

Ciao,

Sure, Larry's skills are unbounded and legendary.   :biggrin:

However, what are the lengths of the std. and HRC RC45 SSSAs, compared to those of the 750/800s. Surely if we want to really investigate the possibilities of fitting belts, we need to collate information about the lengths of all SSSAs (i.e. sprocket to sprocket distances) that might be involved. Only then can we really discover what is, is not or might be possible? All we currently know is that it didn't work for Larry's RC45, but I'm not even sure what S/A he was trying it on. Was it the std one or his HRC one. What I do know is they are different lengths and I've no idea how those lengths relate to the VFRs, yet the length is the crucial element in all this.

Could we perhaps start gathering the length data we need to look further into this?

I'd be curious to see a kit price for this conversion for 5th and 6th gen's (pipe dream I know). Do you think there'd be a market for it that could tolerate the price tag? What do you think this mod would like performance wise on paper? Would the bike be measurably quicker or would all the benefits deliver on the 'feel' side of things only? I am intrigued by this idea and project. 

3 minutes ago, adkfinn

I'd be curious to see a kit price for this conversion for 5th and 6th gen's (pipe dream I know). Do you think there'd be a market for it that could tolerate the price tag? What do you think this mod would like performance wise on paper? Would the bike be measurably quicker or would all the benefits deliver on the 'feel' side of things only? I am intrigued by this idea and project. 

It shouldn't feel any different from a well lubricated and perfectly adjusted chain. The difference is that this feeling would never change and the rear of the bike would stay clean, neither of which can be achieved with a chain.

The problem is still whether or not it can be actually done which is all down to the available belts and distance between the sprockets/pulleys.

51 minutes ago, BiKenG

It shouldn't feel any different from a well lubricated and perfectly adjusted chain. The difference is that this feeling would never change and the rear of the bike would stay clean, neither of which can be achieved with a chain.

The problem is still whether or not it can be actually done which is all down to the available belts and distance between the sprockets/pulleys.

Theoretically, wouldn't the reduction in mass from chain to belt allow for quicker acceleration/transmission of power to the drive wheel (much like a lightened flywheel in a car)? Or is the mass of the chain truly negligible when taking the amount of force into consideration? 

In general, I tend to agree with you, I doubt it'd be measurable in a meaningful way (some fraction of sec quicker in the 1/4mi? some tiny bump in low rpm torque on a dyno?). But what about the feels?

Well I've not had the opportunity to ride the same bike with chain and then with belt, so I can't say from experience (Larry could :-), but I have ridden chain drive bikes and belt drive bikes and I can't say I noticed any difference that I could put down to the different final drive methods. However, you will be correct that the lighter components will have an effect, but I'm sure they'll be too small to notice and why would feel be any different? As long as a chain is correctly adjusted so no actual slack when riding, or at least no more than a belt, there really can't be any great difference in feel. The current state of our potholed roads here in the UK is of far more importance to bikers than trying to judge infinitesimal changes in 'feel' of the drivetrain and in any case the crashing of the suspension on the dreadful roads would mask any actual differences anyway.

But when you get home the back end of the bike is still nice and clean. Well, at least not covered in chain lube. Wonderful.  :wink: