Ducati Monster Forum

A friend recently was involved with the engineering and prototyping of a belt drive (ala Buell) for Ducati.  (to replace the chain drive setup)

There are some definite perks to belts -- longevity, quietness, pricing, tensioners, etc.  Negatives though are gear changes for racers.

Just curious to what the feedback would be if you had a belt instead of a chain on your bike?  Would you still have bought your Monster? 

I saw a pic in another thread of the belt drive on a Buell. I think it ruins the back end of the bike. I cannot picture that thing on my sss.

Don't know if it would have affected my purchase, but the belt pullies I have seen are huge and not exactly attractive. I would like to be able to do easy and inexpensive gear changes, like I do now.

Problem was for me was that the stock gearing was way too tall and I was able to change it for less than $50 to something more manageable.

My Magic 8 Ball says "Definitely Not" but it would have come down to the test ride.  I really loved the torque curve from my S4RS- I just don't see that happening from a belt drive, but I'd like to think that I'm open minded and not just prematurely bald.   ;D

The belt drive would do nothing at all to the torque curve of your bike.  The only seat-of-the-pants differences, provided the same gear ratios were used, would be quieter running and possibly a bit smoother as well.  The torque and power delivery of your bike is largely determined by the state of tune of your engine, while the final drive gearing helps determine how that is fed into the rear wheel.  Changing to a belt drive wouldn't necessarily mean taller gearing, therefore it wouldn't affect your power delivery at all.  Belts have come under heavy scrutiny because they are inherently quieter, cleaner, and can be engineered to be stronger and longer lasting than chains.  The clear advantage of chains is that they facilitate easier (more readily accessible) gearing changes to allow the owner to, for instance, more easily put that 14t c/s sprocket on for more low-end snap.  Since belts are less common, for now, replacement belt pulleys in different ratios aren't yet easily available.  This may change if more manufacturers adopt belts as a way of continuing to meet ever more stringent noise requirements.  We may not like 'em, but they may be headed our way.

do they currently put belts on high torque motored bikes?

I think every HD now produced has a belt drive, or at least many of them.

They're wider than chains, at least the ones I've seen.

Price of a belt competitive with a chain?

Good and bad. Belt: No adjustment after being installed light weight low noise low power loss the bad side is changing ratios are limited if any , that is where the chain is a better choice. I like a belt but I can go either way. Im using the teflon spray wax and it seems to be the cleanest way to keep a chain coated...


Tim

Same here. The only thing I don't like is the whitish coloring of the residue left over...

Everybody in my family but me and my wife (eventually my 2 kids) rides Harleys.  I've ridden Sportsters, Ultra Glides and a Road King.  No thankee.

Will only buy a ducati with a belt in the future, that's all.  No chain

I noticed that you have posted this in two threads.  Would you care to elaborate?  It seems like you have had an issue with your bikes chains or something.  Just curious as to why you have such a strong opinion.   [moto]

i've wondered the same thing. i've read that a belt drive is more efficient at transferring power to the wheel.

it's certainly not just a H****y D*****son thing, guys have been doing it with British bikes for decades, including the original Cafe racers.

(http://i299.photobucket.com/albums/mm314/TopangaDuc/195963545_827072e975.jpg)

(http://i299.photobucket.com/albums/mm314/TopangaDuc/Triton02.jpg)

Belt drives are neat.

Race-inspired bikes need chains.

I do occasionally change sprockets. I like chains.

Belts for valves, chains for drive

I just hate adjusting chains, seems like I can never get them lined up right on the duc.  Never had a problem with them on the dirt bikes.  Just hate adjusting them on the duc, always seems like I f*ck up when adjusting them.

With a belt I can take it to the mechanic to adjust it when he does the valves.  I would love that belt to save me the hassle of adjusting the chain.

My next street bike will be a bmw with a shaft or belt or a harley with a belt.  I'll miss the duc, until a belt is available for it.

I have ridden a few buell's with the belt drive  and it made no difference riding. they are cleaner, quieter (like ducati owners want that [evil] most dont even lube their chains so they rattle).

For me it comes down to three things
1. looks,  just don't like the look of the fat belt and cog. Maybe if they sold gold colored belts.
2. gearing adjustability, since when has the factory shipped a bike with the gearing I want. never. I hear of BMW owners spending big $$ to change gearing.
3. weight, I could be wrong but that rear cog looks heavy. compared to a sprocket. I would like to see a weight comparison of the complete final drive including Idler pulleys. Adding weight to the wheels is the last place I want to put it. carbon fiber pulleys?
 

I just think the rear end with a giant belt pully on it is ugly. I mean really ugly. On a crusier where the back end sits low, and you have a huge rear fender, you can hide it alright, but on a monster it would just look ridiculous.

Ok so I just changed a rear tire on a buell and the rear cog is pretty light. I hear the newer versions are even lighter.

This bike had no idler on the belt so you still had adjustments to make. for tension and alignment on the cogs.

carry on [coffee]