ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Bikes > Beasts
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-22-2012, 01:16 PM   #46
dcraig
n00b
 
dcraig's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2012
Oddometer: 2

I'm a recent Tenere owner. My son and I rode from Washington to California this summer on a 2 week, 3000 mile trip. My Tenere could do everything his R1200 could do, and it was carrying an additional 100 lbs of me around. Both bikes compare well. It comes down to personal preference. We swapped bikes several times. I was just more comfortable on the Tenere, my son of course likes the BMW better. I got a little better mpg, but they were within a half a mile when we finished. For the price difference I'm sold on the Yamaha. This is the 11th bike I've owned in my 54 years and probably one of the best.
dcraig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2012, 06:59 PM   #47
burmbuster
Beastly Adventurer
 
burmbuster's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Location: South East USA
Oddometer: 1,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by cug View Post
And why would that be? They are a pain in the ass to maintain, have sometimes weird and unexpected failures that result in holes in the crank case / engine case, if they fall apart it's always somewhere where you can't get a replacement or the frigging Triumph dealer won't ship to you because you're in the middle of Mongolia or so, they look great for 10k miles and then suddenly fail within another 1k (actual numbers pulled out of thin air, for me chains were great for LONG time, then suddenly deteriorated very quickly), are messy, need lubing in normal times but as soon as it gets sandy or dusty, you really don't want any lube on them, and so on.

Chains are a relict of shitty end user technology, just because they are cheap, halfway light, and transfer power pretty efficiently. That doesn't make them "the best drive". It just makes them not go away, which they should have 30 years ago for normal street motorcycles outside the Race Replica and the < 500cc class. A standard swingarm with a shaft isn't that much heavier or more expensive than a swingarm with a chain, you don't loose much power (And who the hell cares for the 2 or 3 HP outside the race track?) and the convenience is just unbelievable compared to a chain.

Just my 2c of course ...
Ohhhh. Is that why most performance bikes still have them? They transfer power to the rear wheel better than any other drive system (power transfer loss), repairable on the road side, inexpensive to maintain, and save a lot of weight compared to the shaft system. Other than that, I can see why you would prefer the shaft.
__________________
_______________
2013 KTM 690 Enduro R
burmbuster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2012, 07:03 PM   #48
burmbuster
Beastly Adventurer
 
burmbuster's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Location: South East USA
Oddometer: 1,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superstar View Post
Define 'best'.

This is my first shaft drive, but I have not found any negative to it thus far versus a chain.
The shaft system is heavy compared to the chain and if it fails you are screwed. I have owned both as well. If I had another cruiser/tourer I can see another shaft but not off road.
__________________
_______________
2013 KTM 690 Enduro R
burmbuster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2012, 07:55 PM   #49
GrahamD
Beastly Adventurer
 
GrahamD's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2009
Location: Blue Mnts Ozstralia
Oddometer: 5,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by burmbuster View Post
Ohhhh. Is that why most performance bikes still have them? They transfer power to the rear wheel better than any other drive system (power transfer loss), repairable on the road side, inexpensive to maintain, and save a lot of weight compared to the shaft system. Other than that, I can see why you would prefer the shaft.
Most shaft systems, like for instance cars, trucks 4WD vehicles have few issues. Yes they can break but not often if used withing spec. Some vehicles have had problems with shafts in the past, but generally they keep on keeping on.
So repairing shafts on the side of the road is generally, with one or two notable exceptions not an issue.

Reparable on the roadside, Yep. If you have parts. Not much good trying to repair a chain drive system if the front sprocket has no teeth and you have no parts is there? Yes you can take spares and many different bits can interchange so it is an easier fix.

As far as power transfer goes a NEW well maintained chain has good power transfer and that goes down hill quickly as the clag builds up and the teeth wear. Most Dirt bikes don't get much life from a chain either. But generally better power transfer. In my case I would prefer "better efficiency". Most bikes have plenty of power available at the back wheel these days, shaft or no shaft.

As far as the sports bike thing goes, I reckon the sooner they stop making "sport bike" chain systems the better. Put some bloody covers on the things and it will be better for off road duties. Why we still have to put up with open chain systems on "adv bikes" is beyond me, except maybe it just looks cool.

I don't care either way. I'll never run a chain without an oiler again though.
__________________
"It's better to ride a boring bike than push an interesting one" ... Canuman

"I just may as well admit that my other bikes are toast. I don't ride them. Plain and simple. I didn't want this. It wasn't the plan." - snakebitten
GrahamD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 12:18 AM   #50
cug
--
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: Sunny California
Oddometer: 4,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by burmbuster View Post
Ohhhh. Is that why most performance bikes still have them?
The sooner they die the better (the chains, not that I care for performance bikes either, just plain don't get it why people want that kind of power on public roads). Nobody really can distinguish between 155 and 160HP anyways. And nobody really needs that kind of power outside of a race track. If you really want it, sure, suit yourself. But why combine it with an archaic final drive system just to get these few % more that you won't notice anyways?

Quote:
Originally Posted by burmbuster View Post
They transfer power to the rear wheel better than any other drive system (power transfer loss),
Completely irrelevant on modern bikes, midsize and up. Especially as most chains are in such bad shape that this isn't even true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by burmbuster View Post
repairable on the road side,
You generally shouldn't have to repair a shaft, they should just plain work. And overall - as long as you don't have a full failure, the typical failures of a shaft over the usage of a bike are mostly less expensive than the various chains and sprockets you go through during the same amount of miles. Like one final drive failure in 100k miles, five sets of chains and sprockets (plus the time to install them) - evens out pretty easy. Might even be better off with the shaft.

As long as the shaft is reliable (and most are just that), it's a complete non-issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by burmbuster View Post
inexpensive to maintain,
Pretty much any other system is better, easier, and more convenient.

Quote:
Originally Posted by burmbuster View Post
and save a lot of weight compared to the shaft system.
A chain for a high powered bike is heavy. I don't think a modern, well designed shaft is that much more, maybe a bit, but not enough that it's even worth thinking about it. The weight is so low, you loose the same amount by going to rest room before doing drag races ...

What would you say if you had to to oil a chain on your car every evening on longer trips or whenever you gas up? Ridiculous, right? Why is it different on a bike? The arguments above all aren't really that big if you really run the numbers.

Why we still have these things? Because they are cheaper for the manufacturers. That's all. And because customers don't demand better technology enough.
cug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 02:05 AM   #51
Bugz
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Oddometer: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by cug View Post
The sooner they die the better (the chains, not that I care for performance bikes either, just plain don't get it why people want that kind of power on public roads). Nobody really can distinguish between 155 and 160HP anyways. And nobody really needs that kind of power outside of a race track. If you really want it, sure, suit yourself. But why combine it with an archaic final drive system just to get these few % more that you won't notice anyways?



Completely irrelevant on modern bikes, midsize and up. Especially as most chains are in such bad shape that this isn't even true.



You generally shouldn't have to repair a shaft, they should just plain work. And overall - as long as you don't have a full failure, the typical failures of a shaft over the usage of a bike are mostly less expensive than the various chains and sprockets you go through during the same amount of miles. Like one final drive failure in 100k miles, five sets of chains and sprockets (plus the time to install them) - evens out pretty easy. Might even be better off with the shaft.

As long as the shaft is reliable (and most are just that), it's a complete non-issue.



Pretty much any other system is better, easier, and more convenient.



A chain for a high powered bike is heavy. I don't think a modern, well designed shaft is that much more, maybe a bit, but not enough that it's even worth thinking about it. The weight is so low, you loose the same amount by going to rest room before doing drag races ...

What would you say if you had to to oil a chain on your car every evening on longer trips or whenever you gas up? Ridiculous, right? Why is it different on a bike? The arguments above all aren't really that big if you really run the numbers.

Why we still have these things? Because they are cheaper for the manufacturers. That's all. And because customers don't demand better technology enough.
A modern well designed shaft is quite a bit heavier. Even compared to your 'heavy' chain for a high powered motorcycle. A shaft is quite a bit more expensive as well although over the motorcycle life they probably come out even. A shaft isn't technologically advanced. They've pretty much been invented before the wheel.

If shafts would be superior to chains they wouldn't have a use. You never see a MotoGP bike with a shaft isn't it?

The reason BMW and Moto Guzzi used shafts in first instance wasn't for the reliability of the thing but to transfer their power from their clutch to the backwheel. A shaft has to be used if you have to convert power in a different direction (90 degrees on a motorcycle with a driveshaft placed in the length of the motorcycle).

Don't get me wrong. I love shafts for motorbikes. Though chains have their uses as well (You realize that a few % more power loss means a few % less MPG as well?). I would like to see if manufactures started building enclosed chains on their bikes though. Maintenance would go down quite a bit and you could easily get 50K miles out of a modern chain then.
Bugz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 04:54 PM   #52
cug
--
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: Sunny California
Oddometer: 4,842
You haven't even really read or understood what I mentioned above, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bugz View Post
A modern well designed shaft is quite a bit heavier.
And I still think this is completely irrelevant. The weight is super low, in absolute numbers not that much more than a standard swingarm plus chain (a few kg more). Really, on a 200+ motorcycle this difference is completely bogus when you think of the benefits.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bugz View Post
A shaft is quite a bit more expensive as well although over the motorcycle life they probably come out even.
You are just repeating what I said above. It's more expensive to build, even if every motorcycle had a failure for each 100k miles it would end up costing the same as chains and sprockets and lube for those heavy duty bikes.

Add to that the time and inconvenience of the chain, I can only say: thank you, but chains suck. If there is something I have not enough of, it's time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bugz View Post
A shaft isn't technologically advanced.
Compared to a chain a Paralever is rocket science ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bugz View Post
If shafts would be superior to chains they wouldn't have a use. You never see a MotoGP bike with a shaft isn't it?
Who the heck cares about MotoGP? Are you racing a MotoGP bike on the street? Or the Dalton or Dempster? Or on the backroads in some godforsaken National Forest? Very likely not. So who cares? Formula 1 cars have single seat open cockpits, do I want that in my car? Certainly not ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bugz View Post
The reason BMW and Moto Guzzi used shafts in first instance wasn't for the reliability of the thing but to transfer their power from their clutch to the backwheel. A shaft has to be used if you have to convert power in a different direction (90 degrees on a motorcycle with a driveshaft placed in the length of the motorcycle).
Bullshit. You can convert directions within the engine / transmission housing and be done with it. That done for example for the NT700V, and the FJR, and the Super Tenere. Nothing preventing you from doing the same on a Boxer and hooking a chain to the output.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bugz View Post
You realize that a few % more power loss means a few % less MPG as well?
Again, who cares? My R1200GS got nearly the same mileage as my Tiger. That was a heavier, bigger, bulkier 1200cc with 15HP more output, a shaft and a big ass windshield.

Again, that'll also be in the low single digit percentage, therefore, nobody cares. Especially motorcycle riders. If they cared, they'd travel in cars with four people all the time. My wife's TDI get's the same mileage as my Tiger. And that car weighs something like 7 times the Tiger and can carry four people doing so.

There was an interview with some manufacturers in a German magazine maybe about a year ago, where they test rode several bikes through city, highway, and backroad traffic and then asked the manufacturers what they are doing about the abysmal mileage and the general response was: nothing because the customers don't care.

I do care about, but that doesn't bring me to the point of buying a Honda NC700 or so. I'd like interesting motorcycles with better mileage. Not boring ones.

In my personal opinion, all but one of the arguments brought up for chains have absolutely no value in real life riding for normal people. The only one that holds true is cost of manufacturing and therefore sales price.

Oh, and I think for commuting, really nothing is worse on a motorcycle than having to fill up the tank and oil the chain twice a week. That's just awful in this day and age.
cug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 07:25 PM   #53
Ham
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Oddometer: 308
If you LIKE the Yammy, you would LOVE the Guzzi.
Ham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 04:54 PM   #54
burmbuster
Beastly Adventurer
 
burmbuster's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Location: South East USA
Oddometer: 1,429
Eh?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cug View Post
The sooner they die the better (the chains, not that I care for performance bikes either, just plain don't get it why people want that kind of power on public roads). Nobody really can distinguish between 155 and 160HP anyways. And nobody really needs that kind of power outside of a race track. If you really want it, sure, suit yourself. But why combine it with an archaic final drive system just to get these few % more that you won't notice anyways?



Completely irrelevant on modern bikes, midsize and up. Especially as most chains are in such bad shape that this isn't even true.



You generally shouldn't have to repair a shaft, they should just plain work. And overall - as long as you don't have a full failure, the typical failures of a shaft over the usage of a bike are mostly less expensive than the various chains and sprockets you go through during the same amount of miles. Like one final drive failure in 100k miles, five sets of chains and sprockets (plus the time to install them) - evens out pretty easy. Might even be better off with the shaft.

As long as the shaft is reliable (and most are just that), it's a complete non-issue.



Pretty much any other system is better, easier, and more convenient.



A chain for a high powered bike is heavy. I don't think a modern, well designed shaft is that much more, maybe a bit, but not enough that it's even worth thinking about it. The weight is so low, you loose the same amount by going to rest room before doing drag races ...

What would you say if you had to to oil a chain on your car every evening on longer trips or whenever you gas up? Ridiculous, right? Why is it different on a bike? The arguments above all aren't really that big if you really run the numbers.

Why we still have these things? Because they are cheaper for the manufacturers. That's all. And because customers don't demand better technology enough.
What I read here is opinion and not fact. I stated the facts and you counter with a personal opinion not based on facts. And your wrong about the weight. There is no possible way that a drive chain, a steel front sprocket, and an aluminum rear sprocket is anywhere near the weight of a drive shaft and final drive unit.
__________________
_______________
2013 KTM 690 Enduro R
burmbuster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 05:02 PM   #55
cug
--
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: Sunny California
Oddometer: 4,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by burmbuster View Post
What I read here is opinion and not fact. I stated the facts and you counter with a personal opinion not based on facts. And your wrong about the weight. There is no possible way that a drive chain, a steel front sprocket, and an aluminum rear sprocket is anywhere near the weight of a drive shaft and final drive unit.
Of course I'm offering an opinion - same as you. You are offering the opinion that anything you mentioned (power, weight) is relevant. And I believe it's not. It can't be because the differences are laughably small.
cug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 05:25 PM   #56
burmbuster
Beastly Adventurer
 
burmbuster's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Location: South East USA
Oddometer: 1,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by cug View Post
Of course I'm offering an opinion - same as you. You are offering the opinion that anything you mentioned (power, weight) is relevant. And I believe it's not. It can't be because the differences are laughably small.
What I stated are facts. Not opinions. How relevant they are to your choices is your opinion. I never stated how high or low those facts are when considering relevance because that's an opinion. You are arguing for the sake of arguing but hey, it's a free world, for now.
Not one thing I stated can be argued against because its a fact.
If all you do is ride slabs then the drive shaft is the way to go. If you travel off road a good bit then the chain is the way to go. One rock or log or awkward spill and its over with a shaft. That's another reason why MX, SX, Enduro, and the vast majority of other off road capable bikes use a chain.
If you prefer the shaft, which apparently you do, then that's great. But trying to refute known facts with a personal opinion is, well, silly at best.
__________________
_______________
2013 KTM 690 Enduro R
burmbuster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 05:38 PM   #57
cug
--
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: Sunny California
Oddometer: 4,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by burmbuster View Post
What I stated are facts.
I think that BS because:

Quote:
Ohhhh. Is that why most performance bikes still have them? They transfer power to the rear wheel better than any other drive system (power transfer loss), repairable on the road side, inexpensive to maintain, and save a lot of weight compared to the shaft system. Other than that, I can see why you would prefer the shaft.
You ask a question. You state a fact based on the assumption that a chain is always perfectly maintained and in perfect condition, which is not true in most situations, then you offer an opinion (about the repair), again an opinion (about cost of maintenance - a shaft is basically maintenance free ...), then a fuzzy "a lot of weight".

Sorry, but your facts are useless in the real world. I prefer a shaft solely for my own laziness, and I'm perfectly fine having the opinion that chains belong on race bikes, super light dirt bikes, and chain saws. Not on a bike for a normal
everyday rider, whether or not he rides off-pavement or not, doesn't really matter in the real world - again in my opinion.
cug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 08:39 AM   #58
pluric
Gimpy Adventurer
 
pluric's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Location: Salt Lake
Oddometer: 16,194
Going into the third round the judges have cug in a slight lead over Burmbuster
in what is turning out ot be an unsuspected slugfest.

....
pluric is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 09:11 AM   #59
cug
--
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: Sunny California
Oddometer: 4,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by pluric View Post
....
I'll take the model and shut up ... no problem. I'm easily influenced ...
cug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 10:49 AM   #60
pretbek
Studly Adventurer
 
pretbek's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Oddometer: 982
Quote:
Originally Posted by pluric View Post
Going into the third round the judges have cug in a slight lead over Burmbuster
in what is turning out ot be an unsuspected slugfest.

....

Those people in the background seem to not give a hoot about what is going on in the ring...
pretbek is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 07:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014