Drive type, does it matter?

[DriveHard]

I think they are staying with heaver chains because of EC... Engineers Choice... but some Engineers did choose to race and win employing the light weight belt advantage...

View attachment 156432

BLS, I do appreciate your reply, but I am not sure I agree with it. As an engineer, I want to win...and I can't imagine the pressure put on an engineer that is in charge of making design choices for a race bike. I must consider safety of the rider, reliability, weight, power transfer, but most importantly winning. If race engineers choose (for the majority) over and over to go with chains...there has to be a competitive advantage. Why? It is heavier...maybe more robust (reliable) under race conditions (which has often been given up for speed advantage), or more efficient to get more power to the tarmac.
I am personally a belt fan...if I had the choice, both my rides would have it, but there has to be a reason chains are chosen for high performance bikes again and again. As an engineer, I would have to hang my hat on efficiency and reliability. I really do love belts, one of my top three favorite bikes I owned was a Buell XB12XT...loved that drivetrain...wish I never would have sold it. A belt would be perfect on my Husky! I have to say it would kill the character of my Guzzi though ;-)

 

[1foxracing]

Power transfer (NOT COST) is #1 in racing, with weight being a close second. If the chain system is heavier...why are they staying with chains?

The real answer is for quick/easy gearing changes. There are many more manufactures of sprockets V the Cog wheels that belts use.

 

[DriveHard]

The real answer is for quick/easy gearing changes. There are many more manufactures of sprockets V the Cog wheels that belts use.

So with the budget of MotoGP, they could not afford a few different belt drive sprockets and belts to float around for a competitive advantage? For the every day guy hitting up semi-competitive track days I would agree...but for top level racing I still don't think that makes sense.

 

[repairman54]

In racing chains are the easiest to swap and tune. In GP they may only change a tooth or two front or rear to fine tune vs changing trans gearing. Greater fine tuning and change chains after every run.
For road use give me a belt any day. Quiet running, chain noise bugs me now that I've got belt drives.
Ny neighbor just got a Slingshot, 2-liter motor with belt drive spinning a big rear tire. I took it for a ride, that thing spins that big tire with ease.

 

[1foxracing]

So with the budget of MotoGP, they could not afford a few different belt drive sprockets and belts to float around for a competitive advantage? For the every day guy hitting up semi-competitive track days I would agree...but for top level racing I still don't think that makes sense.

When it comes to replacing a drive belt, the process usually entails removing the swingarm.
This is usually not a speedy process.

 

[DriveHard]

When it comes to replacing a drive belt, the process usually entails removing the swingarm.
This is usually not a speedy process.

Through engineering for replacement, I know this is easy to overcome, as it is not necessary. It is on some bikes today, because the belt is considered such low maintenance that it is ok to make it more difficult to replace.

 

[HangFire]

Thanks everyone.. doing some thinking and I'm considering just going with a 250cc to start out. That way I could also teach my boys to ride. Also thinking about the

KLR650. Both are chains but I guess not the end of the world. Messed with chains on my regular bikes so do have some experience with them. I have till fall I think, prices are stupid right now. I didn't think they were bad until I seen new prices. I can buy a new one for not much more and get FI.

You like the Shadow, but you're also recognizing that you're a beginner. That's great. I'm in the camp, get a first bike that can at least cruise home on the (late evening, light traffic) highway after a day on the scenic back roads. Some late model 250's and 300's can certainly do that, if your personal heft is not pushing their weight limit. An old Rebel 250 is a great starter bike but asmatic on the highway, and should not be used to judge more modern bikes in that CC range.

While current Shadows are available in only 750cc, older ones come in smaller engine sizes. All of them are fairly beginner friendly, if you're not afraid of fixing up an older bike, there are Shadow 500's, 550's and 600's out there, but I would avoid the 1100's for now. If going used, get as good a condition as possible, not a project bike.

Most important metric for a beginner's bike: Can you pick it up alone? Second most important: Can I flat-foot it, or nearly so?

Personally I'm not a fan of the current Rebel's, due to the odd foot-forward rider triangle... but it may be just your thing, I don't know. They certainly are a lot of value for the money. Even the 300 has no problem cruising home on the highway.

KLR650 is not the worst choice for a beginner, the tall suspension might pogo hard on you if you're not smooth with the clutch. It's a very different choice than a Shadow. I don't know your inseam, being able to flat-foot (or nearly flat-foot) might be harder for you, it's a taller bike than a Shadow.

I was in your position a few years back. Tell yourself, your first bike doesn't have to be your only bike, or your last bike. Take your best shot at it, learn and if necessary, move on. And they're not spouses, you can have more than one at a time. A sport, a cruiser, and dirt bike makes a nice trio, I'm there right now but looking to trade up on at least one of them.

What is a VMAX 250 or 650? The VMAX is a 1200

I think that should be YMAX. VMAX is not a beginner's bike, lol.

 

[DriveHard]

You like the Shadow, but you're also recognizing that you're a beginner. That's great. I'm in the camp, get a first bike that can at least cruise home on the (late evening, light traffic) highway after a day on the scenic back roads. Some late model 250's and 300's can certainly do that, if your personal heft is not pushing their weight limit. An old Rebel 250 is a great starter bike but asmatic on the highway, and should not be used to judge more modern bikes in that CC range.

While current Shadows are available in only 750cc, older ones come in smaller engine sizes. All of them are fairly beginner friendly, if you're not afraid of fixing up an older bike, there are Shadow 500's, 550's and 600's out there, but I would avoid the 1100's for now. If going used, get as good a condition as possible, not a project bike.

Most important metric for a beginner's bike: Can you pick it up alone? Second most important: Can I flat-foot it, or nearly so?

Personally I'm not a fan of the current Rebel's, due to the odd foot-forward rider triangle... but it may be just your thing, I don't know. They certainly are a lot of value for the money. Even the 300 has no problem cruising home on the highway.

KLR650 is not the worst choice for a beginner, the tall suspension might pogo hard on you if you're not smooth with the clutch. It's a very different choice than a Shadow. I don't know your inseam, being able to flat-foot (or nearly flat-foot) might be harder for you, it's a taller bike than a Shadow.

I was in your position a few years back. Tell yourself, your first bike doesn't have to be your only bike, or your last bike. Take your best shot at it, learn and if necessary, move on. And they're not spouses, you can have more than one at a time. A sport, a cruiser, and dirt bike makes a nice trio, I'm there right now but looking to trade up on at least one of them.


I think that should be YMAX. VMAX is not a beginner's bike, lol.

I agree with a lot of what HangFire is stating.

Best first bike IMHO is a Honda Nighthawk. If you plan to ride on the interstate, I would advocate for a 650cc or higher. There are other UJM's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Japanese_Motorcycle) that are equal to that, but none so as docile, capable, and reliable as the Nighthawk.
Please take a motorcycle training course. They are often offered at your local university for pennies on the dollar for their value. Get a full face helmet, full gear, and as soon as you are comfortable in the slightest, get a track day to understand what your bike is capable of. Your best bet to survive an accident is to know the limits of your machine, and how to avoid it.
At the course they will teach you how to properly steer (did you know to turn right, you PUSH on the right handlebar (counter steer))? How to properly pick up a bike...they often have the smallest female in the class pick up a larger cruiser, and to know that the MAJORITY of your braking force comes from the front wheel. As well as to ride out a rear skid to avoid snap oversteer, to never lock up the front, and how to avoid and overcome obstacles.

 

[Ausfahrt]

Through engineering for replacement, I know this is easy to overcome, as it is not necessary. It is on some bikes today, because the belt is considered such low maintenance that it is ok to make it more difficult to replace.

Huh?

 

[DriveHard]

Huh?

You simply put effort when designing the frame and structure to make it easy to replace the belt.

 

[HangFire]

I agree with a lot of what HangFire is stating.

Thanks. That's a welcome response compared to my last thread! LoL

Best first bike IMHO is a Honda Nighthawk. If you plan to ride on the interstate, I would advocate for a 650cc or higher. There are other UJM's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Japanese_Motorcycle) that are equal to that, but none so as docile, capable, and reliable as the Nighthawk.
Please take a motorcycle training course. They are often offered at your local university for pennies on the dollar for their value. Get a full face helmet, full gear, and as soon as you are comfortable in the slightest, get a track day to understand what your bike is capable of. Your best bet to survive an accident is to know the limits of your machine, and how to avoid it.
At the course they will teach you how to properly steer (did you know to turn right, you PUSH on the right handlebar (counter steer))? How to properly pick up a bike...they often have the smallest female in the class pick up a larger cruiser, and to know that the MAJORITY of your braking force comes from the front wheel. As well as to ride out a rear skid to avoid snap oversteer, to never lock up the front, and how to avoid and overcome obstacles.

All good advice, hopefully the MSF basic course is a requirement for a license in the OP's state.

I just wouldn't get too hung up on the exact CC's. For example, Honda's current 600cc four is faster than its 650cc four, and both are too much for a beginner... meanwhile a new 750cc Shadow is actually a sensible choice (and slower than both, but quite capable).

Without a price range and an idea of OP's inclination to take on an older bike, it's hard to make an exact recommendation.

I like to say there's 3 primary steering modes (ignoring dirt and racing):
1. Low speed pre-stability. Turn the wheel where you want to go, and counter-lean (stand on outer peg).
2. Moderate speed post-stability. Counter-steer to begin lean/turning then as the bike slows into the turn, steer the wheel where you want to go. Neutral lean.
3. High speed. Counter-steer and lean into the turn.

This is all too complex for the MSF Edumacation Complex, so they obscure it with terms like PUSH and hope you just figure it out by feel (at least that was my experience). Trying to get the instructor to admit that "counter-steer" was a thing that could be mentioned led to amusement.

 

[wander2039]

As I mentioned in the first post I have taken the MSF. Actually had pretty good instructors and they went over counter steer. Couldn't really practice it with the speeds in just the parking lot. I need to work on it with the scooter next time I'm out, or at least attempt to. I'm looking from $1.5-3k, probably more like 2-2.5k. The V Star was what I rode in class and I can flat foot though so that's why I'm looking at the V Star and Rebel.

That was a good laugh I have 5 different bikes of the pedal kind with different purposes.

You like the Shadow, but you're also recognizing that you're a beginner. That's great. I'm in the camp, get a first bike that can at least cruise home on the (late evening, light traffic) highway after a day on the scenic back roads. Some late model 250's and 300's can certainly do that, if your personal heft is not pushing their weight limit. An old Rebel 250 is a great starter bike but asmatic on the highway, and should not be used to judge more modern bikes in that CC range.

While current Shadows are available in only 750cc, older ones come in smaller engine sizes. All of them are fairly beginner friendly, if you're not afraid of fixing up an older bike, there are Shadow 500's, 550's and 600's out there, but I would avoid the 1100's for now. If going used, get as good a condition as possible, not a project bike.

Most important metric for a beginner's bike: Can you pick it up alone? Second most important: Can I flat-foot it, or nearly so?

Personally I'm not a fan of the current Rebel's, due to the odd foot-forward rider triangle... but it may be just your thing, I don't know. They certainly are a lot of value for the money. Even the 300 has no problem cruising home on the highway.

KLR650 is not the worst choice for a beginner, the tall suspension might pogo hard on you if you're not smooth with the clutch. It's a very different choice than a Shadow. I don't know your inseam, being able to flat-foot (or nearly flat-foot) might be harder for you, it's a taller bike than a Shadow.

I was in your position a few years back. Tell yourself, your first bike doesn't have to be your only bike, or your last bike. Take your best shot at it, learn and if necessary, move on. And they're not spouses, you can have more than one at a time. A sport, a cruiser, and dirt bike makes a nice trio, I'm there right now but looking to trade up on at least one of them.


I think that should be YMAX. VMAX is not a beginner's bike, lol.

 

[vavavroom]

Don't some bikes have a belt from the engine to the transmission and a chain from the transmission to the wheel? I think there is or at least was such a thing.

 

[barryh]

Don't some bikes have a belt from the engine to the transmission and a chain from the transmission to the wheel? I think there is or at least was such a thing.

You just highlighted an important point. In all the discussion about efficiency of power transfer we need to remember that what matters is the overall efficiency from the crankshaft to the rear wheel. i.e the sum of primary drive losses, gearbox losses and final drive losses.

It makes me wonder if my shaft drive is as inefficient as all that because I only have gearbox and final drive losses.

 

[cheesepuffs2]

Yet there seems to be a BITOG bias against timing belts, and in favor of timing chains. Not much evidence in favor of either, just a thing to talk about on the interwebs.

Because it's not a bias against belts, it's a bias against maintenance. Timing chains and motorcycle belt drives have one thing in common - they (usually) don't require any attention. Both timing belts and motorcycle drive chains have something in common too - they require tending to the vehicle.

 

[repairman54]

Don't some bikes have a belt from the engine to the transmission and a chain from the transmission to the wheel? I think there is or at least was such a thing.

HD have an enclosed chain driving the transmission stock form. There are aftermarket belt conversions.