Any Chain drives left?
After owning a couple of dozen chain driven Harleys,it has taken me a while to feel comfortable with the belt.Much quiter and no oil slinging everywhere.All the pro's tell me with proper maintenance,the belt and pulleys should last much longer than a chain.It is a little unnerving thinking how much of a chore it would be to replace the belt over a chain.We will see how it goes.
Yes I miss the days of the oil up the back of the t-shirt and the rain storm with no front fender, NOT !!!!!!!!!
âYes I miss the days of the oil up the back of the t-shirt and the rain storm with no front fender, NOT !!!!!!!!! â
I might shoot up a10 foot rooster tail of rain out the back of my ride, been known to do that, but never had oil up my back ? how does that work, fonz ?
Hay, what I said was the truth, belts canât take the horse power, I am not trying to step on any bodys boots here, I am not talking the ease of not cleaning the rear of a bike with a belt vs chain.
cj
ps: when harley came out with the final drive belt I think in â80 they advertise it, buy hold up the bike off the floor with the belt around and under the tank, around the belt was held up by 1 of the 5 or 6 strands that they used in the belt, look pretty cool, but they did sell a temporary belt you could take on a far ride also ? it had like a master link in it, so easy road side fix.
Constant adjustment, trying not to use too much, or too little oil on them, etc., etc......
I was a little leary of going with the belt drive, but have found them to be very dependable.Normally change them out at around 50,000 miles, but I know guys with 75,000+ miles on them without any problems.
Sure, if you are running 'high horsepower/torque' applications a chain is the only way to go, especially if you are making constant full throttle runs, but for normal output engines up to 100 horsepower a belt if fine.
Back years ago HDs had a small drip oiler on the chains to keep them lubricated and if they dripped to much the chain would sling the excess oil all over the place. Have a friend who was a motor officer in the 70's tell me about just yesterday
Boss Hoss runs a belt on their bikes. You don't see many of them breaking.
The Best of Harley-Davidson for Lifelong Riders
I ran nothing but "chained" Harley's from 1972 up until a few years ago when I got my '96 WideGlide , and after messing withchains foraround 25years I don't miss them one bit.....
Constant adjustment, trying not to use too much, or too little oil on them, etc., etc......
I was a little leary of going with the belt drive, but have found them to be very dependable.Normally change them out at around 50,000 miles, but I know guys with 75,000+ miles on them without any problems.
Sure, if you are running 'high horsepower/torque' applications a chain is the only way to go, especially if you are making constant full throttle runs, but for normal output engines up to 100 horsepower a belt if fine.
"OldFenderGuy"
âI ran nothing but "chained" Harley's from 1972 up until a few years ago when I got my '96 WideGlide , and after messing with chains for around 25 years I don't miss them one bit..... â
They do take some care and feeding : - )
âConstant adjustment, trying not to use too much, or too little oil on them, etc., etc...... â
Didnât use an O ring type ? all you do is spray it once in awhile with 100% silicone, clear, no drips or slings. nothing near constant adjustment.
âI was a little leary of going with the belt drive, but have found them to be very dependable. Normally change them out at around 50,000 miles, but I know guys with 75,000+ miles on them without any problems. â
That is true except if one day a small stone/bolt/nut gets caught between the belt and pulley (small hole), somewhat rare but it dose happen, now that was the only time I mention a bad thing with a belt and that is not something I would do as taking off a belt off a new bike and putting on a chain. I never even hinted that belts were not dependable, what we have here it seems to be a failure to communication or there are some very sensitive people here, (not you OFG), I said chains are used the most with here let me copy what I saidâŚ.â if you ever seen those fire breathing monster engines, take a look, it has a chain on it,â now what part of âfire breathing monster enginesâ doesnât someone get ?
âSure, if you are running 'high horsepower/torque' applications a chain is the only way to go, especially if you are making constant full throttle runs, but for normal output engines up to 100 horsepower a belt if fine.â
You know what your talking about, I wasnât inferring belts couldnât hold up to stage I or II, I am talking lots of horsepower and torque ! remember âfire breathing monster enginesâ
There are only a very few things that people do to their rides that really gets to me and itâs not run belts, the one that makes me real crazy is someone all of a sudden what a chopper look, he does it cheap and dangerous way, buyâs a rake triple tree, (instead of the right way raking the neck) adds some over length tubes and thinks he has a real chopper, all he really has is a dangerous bike that will get him in all kinds of trouble, not bs between belt and chain.
Ride safe, thanks for the input
cj
PS:
Hay that is your shovel above !
âI still run one on my '81 Shovel...
âAnd it even has a kicker, along with the electric start, something that is unheard of these daysâ
sweet shovel pretty much stock except for the drag bars right ?
[color=#000
Boss Hoss runs a belt on their bikes. You don't see many of them breaking.








