Gs 850

[jetmechmarty]

jetmechmarty,
Belt has less mass/weight, show me please !

IAW https://autoportal.com/articles/chai...rive-9253.html, loss with chain is almost 3%, loss with belt is 9%, and loss with driveshaft is 25%. Take those numbers with the proverbial grain of salt.

[donebysunday]

Hi done,
Here is an explanation though you will have to Google for more details.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpJTd4CGbkE

Phil

OK, from what I can find, the difference between belt and chain would not amount to anything most people could feel, 1hp or less on a 100hp engine. Chain is heavier but the sprockets/pulleys used for belts are heavier, so un-sprung weight differences negligible, http://xlforum.net/forums/archive/in...t-1484467.html
The different maintenance or lack there of is most significant in chain, as Marty said auto manufacturers are going back to chain, what could be better maintenance than washing chain constantly in a fresh bath of engine oil.
So I either miss-remembered what I read/heard/saw when I bought my new 79XS1100SF, or things have been re-calculated to more modern terms ?

[donebysunday]

IAW https://autoportal.com/articles/chai...rive-9253.html, loss with chain is almost 3%, loss with belt is 9%, and loss with driveshaft is 25%. Take those numbers with the proverbial grain of salt.

Very interesting, no way I can believe 25% loss with a shaft, as I mentioned Yamaha (I was told) went to 1100 cc to make up for the shaft robbing RWHP. Wasn't the XS1100SF the fastest 1/4 mi. production bike in the world at the time ? Could not have been if the shaft was robbing 25% of the 95 hp. bringing it down to 71.25 hp., could it ?