[YamiGuy]

Although that's what they say when it comes to power (we're not losing that much) for the average rider belt systems present some great gains, maintenance being the big one here, and really who wants to be cleaning chains every 300-500 miles? I know I don't. More time out on the road actually riding is what i'm really after, and less time in my garage or the local shop.

Do you feel like we're missing out on anything by NOT having a chain?
What has your experience been like with both chain and belt driven bikes?

 

[Kevhunts]

Never had a belt drive but I do have a shaft drive on my tenere and I can tell you it's a joy not having to clean & lube a chain.

 

[YamiGuy]

Heard a lot of good about shaft systems although I haven't had one myself. But from what I can make of it, a belt driven system seems to fit that perfect medium to me. Will be interesting to see what sport biker riders will have to say, a lot of those are chain driven.

 

[OpenRoad]

The power gain with a chain vs belt only really matters when you're on a superbike, for a more casual ride like the scr950 a belt is just better imo. No more cleaning and lubing the chain and no more fear of it rusting if I just can be bothered to clean it after riding through a bit of water. Also no chance of the chain snapping and taking my leg with it.

 

[Cruze]

I've also heard mention that replacing the chain is easier and less costly if the situation does arise though

 

[YamiGuy]

That's true but overall a belt driven system requires less overall. It's not so much the cost most riders are worried about but more so the effort they have to go through with maintenance. Chain systems require some dedication and discipline on the riders part, can't be lazy here.

 

[Cruze]

That's true. I think, like you indicated, the main thing is the maintenance. We've already seen them showcased going through the dirt which means all that would be okay so I really think this is the best for what the bike is.