106c.i./1800cc not nuff.

[Bonz]

Never have I read or seen anything to say a shaft drive gives better traction than a belt or chain. 35 years of motorcycle magazines, comparison testing of shaft vs chain driven cycles of all types and haven't seen reference to better traction or anything in the wide world of the Internet.

The XS may give better results compared to other shaft drive cycles because of the engine rotation, but the benefit of reverse rotation is the gyroscopic effect of the crank keeps the front end down. Still would not rival the efficiency of a chain or belt when speaking of the highest percentage of power making it to the ground. Maybe the power loss softens the delivery of power, so traction would theoretically be better in that respect because not as much is making it to the rear wheel.

BMW, Honda Gold Wing, ST1100/1300, others like that have a front to back crankshaft to lessen the inefficiency of engine power traveling across extra gear faces to get to the rear wheel. The XS, 80's vintage in-line 4 cyls of any variety (nighthawks, Suzuki, kawasaki models with shaft drive) relatively speaking are the most inefficient examples of shaft drive, lost a lot of power to the rear wheel from power transferring across gears.

The shaft still has to rotate a specific direction to get forward motion at the hub/wheel, so once it leaves the engine the XS shaft is no different than any other shaft bike.

I love the XS as much as you guys, and would love to see it be true that a shaft of any engine rotation gives better traction than chain or belt. Does anyone have a reference to it as being a true fact?

[jetmechmarty]

Let's see. The diff is on the left side. I think the jacking comes.from the wheel trying to climb the ring gear, does it not? Stiff springs and good dampers alleviate it whether or not my theory is correct. Honda GoldWing, BMW, and Moto Guzzi have the diff on the right. Does that not push the wheel down under accelleration?

[TopCatGr58]

Hey HondaKid,

The Problem with the driveshaft is there are 2 power direction turns...first the middle drive from across the bike 90 degrees to the driveshaft, then again at the Final Drive 90 degrees again to spin the wheel. So even though it's solid metal connections....gears/shafts, etc, there is LOSS of power due to the differential type power transitions....I think it's been quoted to up to 10% or so. WIth the Belt, the power direction is going the same direction, albeit it does get changed from Cw to CCW if it's the XS11 that's been converted to chain/belt drive...I don't know what direction a Hardley spins??

T.C.

[hondakid11]

Please explain how the shaft drive provides direct power and "forces" the tire down "for grip and torque", and the belt drive "allows it to slip".

Sounds like a line from a dealership they fed to someone, somewhere, and got passed on. The belt drive is a more efficient means of transferring power and about as low maintenance as a shaft as well. Tires slipping are about physics, not shaft vs belt.

how is rubber better means of transferring power than solid metal??? im not talking about the tire slipping, im talking about how a belt wears faster than splined metal shaft, and the belt slips.

and the shaft drive doesnt lift the tire, it lift the main frame because of the torque from the shaft.

[3Phase]

He's not kidding

John's serious, the XS11 engine rotates clockwise -- backwards -- and that helps minimize shaft 'jacking' and 'pogoing' that happens to other shaft-driven bikes.

.

[mrhammer2u]

Howard as I understand it, the engine turning backwards means the shaft rotation is transferred to the hub with increased force pushing the wheel down and to the right when extra throttle is applied so the harder you try to accelerate the more it "squats" instead of lifts to increase traction.

Personally, I have never applied enough acceleration to squat into a wheelie, but I have felt the rear try to slide out when powering out of a corner.

John

I heard shaft drive bikes actually lift the rear when hard throttle is applied. I have progressive rear shocks so I have not experienced this (supposedly good aftermarket shocks prevents the lift).

[jwhughes3]

Howard as I understand it, the engine turning backwards means the shaft rotation is transferred to the hub with increased force pushing the wheel down and to the right when extra throttle is applied so the harder you try to accelerate the more it "squats" instead of lifts to increase traction.

Personally, I have never applied enough acceleration to squat into a wheelie, but I have felt the rear try to slide out when powering out of a corner.

John

[3Phase]

Please explain how the shaft drive provides direct power and "forces" the tire down "for grip and torque", and the belt drive "allows it to slip".

It all depends if you use synthetic oil or not

If you use synthetic oil you have to use synthetic rubber tires too. Synthetic rubber tires are grippier to compensate for the synthetic oil being slipperier.

.

[webbcraft2150]

[QUOTE=Bonz;465431]Please explain how the shaft drive provides direct power and "forces" the tire down "for grip and torque", and the belt drive "allows it to slip".

It all depends if you use synthetic oil or not

[Bonz]

Please explain how the shaft drive provides direct power and "forces" the tire down "for grip and torque", and the belt drive "allows it to slip".

Sounds like a line from a dealership they fed to someone, somewhere, and got passed on. The belt drive is a more efficient means of transferring power and about as low maintenance as a shaft as well. Tires slipping are about physics, not shaft vs belt.

[trbig]

I had a buddy with a 110ci Harley all decked out with the Screaming Eagle crate motor and crud. He could get me off the line for the first couple hundred feet.. lots of torque, but after I was up in the mains, I'd still beat him. I didn't smoke him by any means.. he was right there, but I also didn't spend 30k+ on my bike. He traded it off not too long after that for an old 88ci to putt around on. With ape hangars.

[Schming]

I'd take a Goldwing, or other Jap competitor over a Harley. I've taken test rides on quite a few, and never felt any great liking to them, including my twin's Streetrod.

I'd take a Goldwing, or other Jap competitor over a Harley. I've taken test rides on quite a few, and never felt any great liking to them, including my twin's Streetrod.

For a Twin that dislikes twins, how come twin posts ?

[IanDMacDonald]

. . . I suspect if I wanted to ride on a sofa going down the road it would be on one, but that's not how I roll.

I'd take a Goldwing, or other Jap competitor over a Harley. I've taken test rides on quite a few, and never felt any great liking to them, including my twin's Streetrod.

[IanDMacDonald]

. . . I suspect if I wanted to ride on a sofa going down the road it would be on one, but that's not how I roll.

I'd take a Goldwing, or other Jap competitor over a Harley. I've taken test rides on quite a few, and never felt any great liking to them, including my twin's Streetrod.

[Gmac]

Not to knock Harley's and their owners

but they are the Apple of the motor cycle kingdom.

Lots of fanboi's, overpriced with lots of flash and comfort but not a whole lot of go. I suspect if I wanted to ride on a sofa going down the road it would be on one, but that's not how I roll.