Belt Drive

Chassis is all factory stock, but for the tires and brake rotors.

At this point, all I can do is use the measuring tool that is pretty much the industry standard. What it says the bike makes at the rear wheel is all I have to go by. If you calculate it, it would change with every gear, every increase or decrease in RPM... not to mention weather conditions, elevation above sea level... I'm not so anal that I care that much.

On THIS VERY DYNO, with the same correction factors applied for weather and elevation, the bike in stock form put out 75/92. Now it makes 126/134. The best I can hope to do is see if the modifications gave the desired results. In reality, I was disappointed that it didn't make 130/140, which was the goal. We should have kept the old cams...

"Let me put this just as arrogantly as you choose to take it. Neither of those graphs is a bone stock bike"
... I provided a link to one graph only. The site themselves claim the lower figure is for a stock standard bike. That is 'the facts of the matter', as you put it. But like I said, similar figures aren't hard to find. E.g. http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/71801/Motorcycle-Photo-Gallery-Photo/2011-.... Arrogance isn't particularly attractive and so I retract the clever compliment. Knowing how complex stuff works but acting as though one is never wrong, post proof, doesn't make for an oracle. If you acted less of an idiot savant then people would better warm to your often very interesting and thought provoking contributions.

"Others have been marginalizing this, saying it is somehow getting a softer power application"
... you can dress it up anyway you wish, but it was your example, and it is what it is.

"I was just making the point AGAIN since no one seems to have been listening the last several times I made it"
... maybe change the tone and sentiment if you want folk to value your contributions more?

"Maybe I'm just not fitting in here at the good ol' boy's country club. Maybe it's the language barrier. Who knows?"
... could be, but keep trying. We all like triers. Just don't be right all the time. Even if you are sometimes! ;-D

"It just seems incredible to me that the rear wheel would rotate at that speed (13000 rpm) without bursting."
... road going NSR250RR's used to redline at about 19,000 RPM I think?

"Half crazy, as captain scarlet said. You're a very clever guy, even if your manners are appalling."
... I never said his 'manners are appalling'. I probably wouldn't have been that gracious! ;-D

"If I ever get insulted, I'll let you know."
... oh no you won't, oh yes you will, oh no you won't - it's a pantomime thing, you'll have to Wikipedia it.

"the bottom line is, gearing down means more rear wheel torque, and high revving engines are geared down a lot more"
... thanks for the clear explanation. And the other posts in this thread Kev. I know you do this malarkey for a living, but that's just as well, in terms of you having the gift to deliver laymen terms technical clarity in your posts.

"Point being that this is accomplished through a belt final drive, dispelling the claims made early on in this thread that belt final drive systems are limited to low-torque applications."
... and I for one still agree with you on that, without having to reference Boss Hoss's or tuned American V-Twins. Those more rare examples may put out more torque than the latest production Harley's and Victory's, but the production bikes still put out healthy torque, roughly twice that of a supersport 600. And Victories sell reasonable numbers and Harley still manage to sell 100,000 or whatever each year, without continual warranty claims/law suits for belt breakages and the resultant carnage. That is already proof enough for little 'ole me that belt is a viable option for most road bikes in standard trim.

"Why you are so dead set agaist accepting this is beyond me"
... as your word is unequivocally incontestable, I did wonder what Pitts was playing at myself? ;-D

"I see us doing this as brothers in arms as opposed to enemies"
.... on a you're hiding nothing to (anag).

"We both must feel fairly strongly about this"
... stop being so competitive you two. Play nicely! :-D

"Chain or belt?"
... I would just like to take this opportunity to thank you JAG, for remembering what the bloody thread is supposed to be about! I don't give a monkeys what a VicZX-Eleventy V8 makes at the third cleft spiggot. I just want to conjure why belt isn't perceived as a good alternative for a lot of mainstream naked, adventure and lightweight touring bikes? Matters not how much bigger my todger is than the next or not. Except to Miss S, natch.

I'm usually all for threads veering off at a fractal tangent. One thread I started on the TeX forum ended up being a lengthy multi page chat about which was the best biscuits (cookies) you can buy. And jolly interesting reading it was too, especially as a garibaldi and chocky bourbon fan!

However, it would be good to perhaps reign this one back in from power claims and the measuring thereof, back towards the technical or even gut feelings as to why belt isn't the preferred option of manufacturers by choice?

You can tell "tone" and "sentiment" by reading a post here? Amazing...
I'm not here to win your approval. If you value my contribution, great, if not, that's great too.

It is the preferred system for some manufacturers.

Hello half_crazy,

I for one am grateful for your contributions. If it wasn't for your hard data and comments about your drag racing experiences and how the ET times are done I would have continued making wrong calculations resulting in incorrect conclusions.

It was a pleasure having someone like yourself of your experience to communicate with. Thankyou.

Pittsy always has provided interesting and valid points of view. His poor old Kawasaki has been a real workhorse for me. His suggestions in the power thrust curve thread helped me a lot.

Our Captain Scarlet's extensive experience with so many bikes is also a great asset for me, plus he's a very good word smith. I have no idea how he can write so well on so many topics.

Regards,

JAG