After researching into which would be the better option to feature on a bike, a chain or a belt?
I took to the internet to research into this dilemma. Below is my research.
I took to the internet to research into this dilemma. Below is my research.
Why do some cars have chains as a pose to belts and vice versa?
Chain's don't need changing (or not as often?) I had a yaris with a chain.
I assume there must be some sort of benefit to a belt over chain or is it just a way to make money after sale of the car?
No benefit what so ever for a belt, other than the dealers sell more parts, and get more cars back for servicing.
Common misconceptions are that belts are quieter (quite the opposite, a decent chain should make no noise at all where as a belt will whirr) they are more reliable, and there is a negligible difference in cost, hence the reason they are fitted to everything from newer corsas to rolls royces. chains give a lot of warning before they break, where as belts very often give no warning at all.
My understanding is belts are generally cheaper to produce, are reliable enough if maintained properly, & when originally introduced, were quieter in operation. Older chains tended to stretch & break, similar to how belts can now. Engines didn't last as long between rebuilds, so a chain sufficed. These days it's six & two threes: chains run quieter than before, & last longer, but don't offer the maintenance revenue opportunities that belts do.
Chain's don't need changing (or not as often?) I had a yaris with a chain.
I assume there must be some sort of benefit to a belt over chain or is it just a way to make money after sale of the car?
No benefit what so ever for a belt, other than the dealers sell more parts, and get more cars back for servicing.
Common misconceptions are that belts are quieter (quite the opposite, a decent chain should make no noise at all where as a belt will whirr) they are more reliable, and there is a negligible difference in cost, hence the reason they are fitted to everything from newer corsas to rolls royces. chains give a lot of warning before they break, where as belts very often give no warning at all.
My understanding is belts are generally cheaper to produce, are reliable enough if maintained properly, & when originally introduced, were quieter in operation. Older chains tended to stretch & break, similar to how belts can now. Engines didn't last as long between rebuilds, so a chain sufficed. These days it's six & two threes: chains run quieter than before, & last longer, but don't offer the maintenance revenue opportunities that belts do.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=949798