What is the case with belt drive?

On Oct 19, 10:52*am, JennyB wrote:
On Oct 17, 11:46*pm, Andre Jute wrote:

Rereading Lou's posts, I just discovered that a special frame is
required... That makes it expensive to buy one "just to try"!

Unless, perhaps, you have an old elevated stay frame.

Er, what is "an old elevated stay frame"?

Was it made by Otis?

***

Whatever the answer, it does raise the question of whether seatstays
bolted only at the seatlug allow enough movement when unbolted to pass
the drivebelt through.

Andre Jute
The rest is magic hidden in the hub.
For rare hub gear bikes, visit Jute on Bicycles at
http://www.audio-talk.co.uk/fiultra/...20CYCLING.html

On Oct 19, 3:37*am, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message

...

What is the case with belt drive? Efficiency? Reliability? Advantages
and disadvantages? Likehood of seeing it in the hood soon?

Andre Jute
Visit Andre's books at
http://www.audio-talk.co.uk/fiultra/THE%20WRITER'S%20HOUSE.html

What's cool about the current belt drive bikes, from my own personal
experience, is what's missing.

You simply have no concept of how much a chain imparts to the feel of a
bike until you ride one with a belt. You don't know "smooth" until you
try one.

The idea that a belt drive is going to do wonders in terms of lower
maintenance won't bear out, at least not from my talks with the folk at
Gates and from reading the literature. OK, that's not quite right. It
*is* lower maintenance, but it's not lower cost. Belts will run around
$100 and lifespan could be as little as 6,000 miles (they're not totally
clear on that). *But the positive side is that it is, in fact, much
lower maintenance. The belt doesn't have to be lubed, the cog &
chainwheel should last almost forever, and the belt apparently doesn't
vary in efficiency throughout its life. So you just slap on a new belt
ever 6,000 miles or so and you're good to go. No more drivetrain
cleanings. No mess transporting the bike.

But seriously, those things aren't as attractive to me as the different
feel. You just have to ride one and see if it's for you or not.

--Mike-- * * Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReactionBicycles.com

I am very impressed with anything that makes my bike smoother; I have
recently had occasion to be impressed with how smoothness immensely
enhances the cycling experience.

100 dollars to replace the belt does seem a bit stiff, especially
since over here it will probably be 100 Euro or higher, because
everything is much pricier in Urp. But if it is true that the sprocket
and cheinwheel will last forever, possibly in the longer-term there
might be a saving. Nor would I necessarily find a 6000m/10000km belt
service life offputting.

Thanks, Mike. Exactly what I wanted to discover.

Andre Jute
I'm not a know-all. I don't need to be. I know who to ask.

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:21:45 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

"Andre Jute" wrote:
What is the case with belt drive? Efficiency? Reliability? Advantages
and disadvantages? Likehood of seeing it in the hood soon?

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
What's cool about the current belt drive bikes, from my own personal
experience, is what's missing.
You simply have no concept of how much a chain imparts to the feel of
a bike until you ride one with a belt. You don't know "smooth" until
you try one.

SMS wrote:
I'm pretty sure that shaft drive will take over the market by next year.

Well, it's about time. Big technical breakthrough of 1896.
http://www.nostalgic.net/pictures/1638.htm

Benjamin Harrison ... seems like only yesterday...

Dear Andrew,

Alas, Harrison left office in early 1893, just before the glorious
announcement that bicyclists were going to throw off their chains and
embrace shaft-drive:

"It was not until 1893 that a serious attempt was made to do away with
the chain as a driving power for Safety bicycles. Although the chain
has always been declared by the mechanical world as an inferior style
of gearing no one had previous to 1893 produced a chainless wheel
likely to suit every requirement necessary for its successful use.:
http://tinyurl.com/yjwqegc

A modest marketing example of the triumph of chainless:
http://tinyurl.com/yfrqlak

To Harrison's credit, the pneumatic tire flourished during his
administration, from early 1889 to 1893.

But it was the immortal Cleveland who presided over the reign of the
tangent-laced highwheelers (1885-1889) and then returned to power
after a brief interregnum to cast aside the cruel chains of the safety
bicycles in early 1893:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._United_States

Unfortunately, Cleveland's enlightened rule was followed by the
excesses of McKinley, which resulted in the collapse of the bike boom,
encouraged poor service at local bike shops, and led to McKinley's
assassination.

Czolgosz left no doubt that he was driven to shoot the tyrant McKinley
because of poor service at a local bike shop:

"I killed President McKinley because I done my duty. I didn't believe
one man should have so much service and another man should have none."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William...he_Presid ent

1885-1889 Cleveland presides over highwheeler mania

1889-1893 Harrison's lackluster administration of chain safeties

1893-1897 Cleveland returns, shaft-drive appears, bike boom era

1897-1901 McKinley destroys bike boom and LBS service, assassination

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Andre Jute wrote:
On Oct 19, 10:52 am, JennyB wrote:
On Oct 17, 11:46 pm, Andre Jute wrote:

Rereading Lou's posts, I just discovered that a special frame is
required... That makes it expensive to buy one "just to try"!
Unless, perhaps, you have an old elevated stay frame.

Er, what is "an old elevated stay frame"?

Was it made by Otis?

***

Whatever the answer, it does raise the question of whether seatstays
bolted only at the seatlug allow enough movement when unbolted to pass
the drivebelt through.


au courant in 1992:
http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/files/snc13468_122.jpg

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:21:45 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

"Andre Jute" wrote:
What is the case with belt drive? Efficiency? Reliability? Advantages
and disadvantages? Likehood of seeing it in the hood soon?
Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
What's cool about the current belt drive bikes, from my own personal
experience, is what's missing.
You simply have no concept of how much a chain imparts to the feel of
a bike until you ride one with a belt. You don't know "smooth" until
you try one.
SMS wrote:
I'm pretty sure that shaft drive will take over the market by next year.
Well, it's about time. Big technical breakthrough of 1896.
http://www.nostalgic.net/pictures/1638.htm

Benjamin Harrison ... seems like only yesterday...

Dear Andrew,

Alas, Harrison left office in early 1893, just before the glorious
announcement that bicyclists were going to throw off their chains and
embrace shaft-drive:

"It was not until 1893 that a serious attempt was made to do away with
the chain as a driving power for Safety bicycles. Although the chain
has always been declared by the mechanical world as an inferior style
of gearing no one had previous to 1893 produced a chainless wheel
likely to suit every requirement necessary for its successful use.:
http://tinyurl.com/yjwqegc

A modest marketing example of the triumph of chainless:
http://tinyurl.com/yfrqlak

To Harrison's credit, the pneumatic tire flourished during his
administration, from early 1889 to 1893.

But it was the immortal Cleveland who presided over the reign of the
tangent-laced highwheelers (1885-1889) and then returned to power
after a brief interregnum to cast aside the cruel chains of the safety
bicycles in early 1893:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._United_States

Unfortunately, Cleveland's enlightened rule was followed by the
excesses of McKinley, which resulted in the collapse of the bike boom,
encouraged poor service at local bike shops, and led to McKinley's
assassination.

Czolgosz left no doubt that he was driven to shoot the tyrant McKinley
because of poor service at a local bike shop:

"I killed President McKinley because I done my duty. I didn't believe
one man should have so much service and another man should have none."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William...he_Presid ent

1885-1889 Cleveland presides over highwheeler mania

1889-1893 Harrison's lackluster administration of chain safeties

1893-1897 Cleveland returns, shaft-drive appears, bike boom era

1897-1901 McKinley destroys bike boom and LBS service, assassination

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

D'oh.

Thanks

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Oct 19, 11:00*pm, RonSonic wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:35:41 -0600, wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:21:45 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

"Andre Jute" wrote:
What is the case with belt drive? Efficiency? Reliability? Advantages
and disadvantages? Likehood of seeing it in the hood soon?

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
What's cool about the current belt drive bikes, from my own personal
experience, is what's missing.
You simply have no concept of how much a chain imparts to the feel of
a bike until you ride one with a belt. You don't know "smooth" until
you try one.

SMS wrote:
I'm pretty sure that shaft drive will take over the market by next year.

Well, it's about time. Big technical breakthrough of 1896.
http://www.nostalgic.net/pictures/1638.htm

Benjamin Harrison ... seems like only yesterday...

Dear Andrew,

Alas, Harrison left office in early 1893, just before the glorious
announcement that bicyclists were going to throw off their chains and
embrace shaft-drive:

"It was not until 1893 that a serious attempt was made to do away with
the chain as a driving power for Safety bicycles. Although the chain
has always been declared by the mechanical world as an inferior style
of gearing no one had previous to 1893 produced a chainless wheel
likely to suit every requirement necessary for its successful use.:
http://tinyurl.com/yjwqegc

A modest marketing example of the triumph of chainless:
http://tinyurl.com/yfrqlak

To Harrison's credit, the pneumatic tire flourished during his
administration, from early 1889 to 1893.

But it was the immortal Cleveland who presided over the reign of the
tangent-laced highwheelers (1885-1889) and then returned to power
after a brief interregnum to cast aside the cruel chains of the safety
bicycles in early 1893:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._United_States

Unfortunately, Cleveland's enlightened rule was followed by the
excesses of McKinley, which resulted in the collapse of the bike boom,
encouraged poor service at local bike shops, and led to McKinley's
assassination.

Czolgosz left no doubt that he was driven to shoot the tyrant McKinley
because of poor service at a local bike shop:

"I killed President McKinley because I done my duty. I didn't believe
one man should have so much service and another man should have none."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William...tion#Death_of_...

1885-1889 *Cleveland presides over highwheeler mania

1889-1893 *Harrison's lackluster administration of chain safeties

1893-1897 *Cleveland returns, shaft-drive appears, bike boom era

1897-1901 *McKinley destroys bike boom and LBS service, assassination

This is just like watching the History Channel.

Nothing new about special interest groups. You put together enough
unrepresentative tiny minorities and you can elect a president
beholden to all of them. It's basically a log-rolling exercise.

But Fogel's brilliant analysis of cyclists' influence on late 19C
American presidents is not "just like watching the History Channel" --
it is far, far superior, a model for the analysis of every other group
off cutting edge early adopters interacting with the civil power of
its day.

Andre Jute
A little inaccuracy sometimes saves tons of explanation. --H.H.Munro
("Saki")(1870-1916)

Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

AMuzi wrote:

Andre Jute wrote:

JennyB wrote:

Unless, perhaps, you have an old elevated stay frame.

Er, what is "an old elevated stay frame"?

au courant in 1992:http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/files/snc13468_122.jpg
[picture of Yeti Ultimate]

There were also Mantis, Haro, Nishiki, Redline, Alpinestars... surely
I'm forgetting some others?

Chalo

JennyB wrote:
Unless, perhaps, you have an old elevated stay frame.

Andre Jute wrote:
Er, what is "an old elevated stay frame"?

AMuzi wrote:
au courant in 1992:http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/files/snc13468_122.jpg
[picture of Yeti Ultimate]

Chalo wrote:
There were also Mantis, Haro, Nishiki, Redline, Alpinestars... surely
I'm forgetting some others?

Lots; Bianchi Ragno (handmade in Italy!) and Merlin Ti,
inter alia. It was quite fashionable at the time.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

JennyB wrote:
Unless, perhaps, you have an old elevated stay frame.

Andre Jute wrote:
Er, what is "an old elevated stay frame"?

AMuzi wrote:
au courant in 1992:http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/files/snc13468_122.jpg
[picture of Yeti Ultimate]

Chalo wrote:
There were also Mantis, Haro, Nishiki, Redline, Alpinestars... surely
I'm forgetting some others?

http://members.cox.net/phxpearl/Vice...inBike2web.jpg

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

In article ,
Andrew Price wrote:

On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 22:21:21 GMT, Ryan Cousineau
wrote:

[---]

As the owner of Alfine-8 and a Sturmey-Archer bikes, I'd point out 'hubs
are heavy, expensive, and adjustment is fussy. The S-A, in particular,
will repay any mis-adjustment with intermittent freewheeling, a
surprisingly dangerous failure mode.

I knew about the SA problem, but is the Alfine-8 really so difficult
to adjust, say, compared with a bog-standard Nexus hub?

It's identical in most ways to a Nexus-8, and I assume that includes
adjustment.

The adjustment of a Shimano 8-speed is probably easier than most
derailer setups. On the other hand, there's the little dance you have to
do if you need to change the rear tire. Protip: practice releasing and
replacing the shifter cable and home. You will thank me for that advice
after your first flat tire.

I'm not sour on gearhubs as a matter of course. Of course! I actually
have, um, four gearhubs, though one is part of an unassembled pile, and
one is a Sachs Duomatic, which admittedly has the easiest shifting
adjustment possible (none).

I just wanted to apply some needed tonic to the debate. Derailers are
popular for a reason, and hub gears have their issues.

--
Ryan Cousineau http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."