Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[DonTom]

Nope....unless you cut the swingarm or fit a swingarm from another bike....the chain going "through" the swingarm is the problem. You can't cut the belt to make it fit, but you can cut a chain....whereas the Experia doesn't have this problem, as you can see, circled in red in the pic below:Smithy.

OIC.   It's the bottom of the chain that goes through the middle of swing arm. Thanks for pointing that out as that was I didn't even notice that when I first looked at the bike, looking at the upper part of the chain.


-Don-  Auburn, CA

[DonTom]

Not an simple operation I'm afraid unless you're handy with tools, lathe, mill etc.

I am okay around most tools, as I do most of most of my own automotive/ motorcycle work when possible-- which includes things like replacing the DCFC fuse inside the SS9- battery which required me to remove the battery to work on it. A rather difficult job, which I did complete. You probably read about it here.


But changing a drive chain to a belt is not any type of work I have attempted to do in the past. I must congratulate you for even attempting to do such a job and better yet, successfully completing it!


I am not sure if I want to attempt this job or not, but I also prefer belts to chains--at least until a belt snaps on me. My Harley as well as my three Zeros use a belt and they are a lot less hassle than are chains.


But have you compared your range?


"Chain drives are significantly more efficient[/size] at transferring power to the rear wheel than belt drives, making them the preferred choice for performance-focused motorcycles. [/size][/size]Chain drives typically lose only 1% to 4% of power (96–99% efficiency), offering the most direct power transfer and fastest acceleration.

• Belt drives generally incur higher power losses, ranging from 9% to 15% (85–91% efficiency), due to the friction and flexibility of the rubber-reinforced material.

• [/size]While belts offer benefits like quieter operation and lower maintenance, the chain remains superior for raw power transmission efficiency."
  
  
  -Don-  Auburn, CA

[smithy]

I am okay around most tools, as I do most of most of my own automotive/ motorcycle work when possible-- which includes things like replacing the DCFC fuse inside the SS9- battery which required me to remove the battery to work on it. A rather difficult job, which I did complete. You probably read about it here.


But changing a drive chain to a belt is not any type of work I have attempted to do in the past. I must congratulate you for even attempting to do such a job and better yet, successfully completing it!


I am not sure if I want to attempt this job or not, but I also prefer belts to chains--at least until a belt snaps on me. My Harley as well as my three Zeros use a belt and they are a lot less hassle than are chains.


But have you compared your range?


"Chain drives are significantly more efficient[/size] at transferring power to the rear wheel than belt drives, making them the preferred choice for performance-focused motorcycles. [/size][/size]Chain drives typically lose only 1% to 4% of power (96–99% efficiency), offering the most direct power transfer and fastest acceleration.

• Belt drives generally incur higher power losses, ranging from 9% to 15% (85–91% efficiency), due to the friction and flexibility of the rubber-reinforced material.

• [/size]While belts offer benefits like quieter operation and lower maintenance, the chain remains superior for raw power transmission efficiency."
  
  
  -Don-  Auburn, CA

Hi Don,

As far as I can tell....the range I'm seeing is essentially unchanged compared to when I was running chain & sprockets.....I travel the same route to work and back each day and I'm not seeing any perceivable difference at my normal "checkpoints". Some days it's actually better, but certainly no worse, there may be other factors at work here, wind direction, my speed and whether I can ride behind similar speed traffic etc...

When they say belts aren't as efficient or take considerably more % to drive than a chain drive system....I was sceptical. I did some digging and this line of thought goes back a considerable length of time, something like 20-25 years....Belts and pulley design has changed for the better in recent years IMHO.....gone are the days of a belt drive system being very "draggy" compared to a chain....

The tensile strength of the belts has come a long way too.....the belt I'm currently running has a higher tensile strength than a standard 520 chain....go figure. Some belts can handle over 9000lbs of tensile force....whilst a standard 520 chain is only ~6400lbs.

Smithy.

[Grauteufel]

That power efficiency of the chain also assumes a run in, but unworn chain in excellent condition. The 9-15% loss for belts appears to have been based on V-belts, a synchronous belt or timing belt like what Smithy has installed is easily over 98% efficient in power transfer.

[T.S. Zarathustra]

I chatted with AI regarding the efficiency number that are on the internet and are widely quoted.
"No peer-reviewed or independent laboratory studies specifically testing motorcycle belt and chain drive efficiency under controlled conditions were found.
The most frequently cited data comes from a 2012 Friction Facts laboratory test, but it was conducted on bicycles, not motorcycles"
Test here; https://www.cyclingabout.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Gates-Carbon-Belt-Drive-efficiency-vs-traditional-single-Friction-Facts.pdf

In short.
Gates Carbon Drive vs. Chain Efficiency Test
Chain loss: 2.92 watts (average)
Belt loss: 3.93 watts (average)
Tested at 250W load, 95 RPM, with belt preloaded to 85 lb (per Gates guidelines)
While this test is rigorous and repeatable, it does not simulate motorcycle power levels (typically 50–150+ hp vs. ~0.3 hp in the test). The mechanical principles (friction, hysteresis, preload) are relevant, but scaling to higher torque and speed may alter efficiency outcomes.

Some motorcycle-specific claims (e.g., 97–99% efficiency for both systems) appear in manufacturer-backed or trade publications, such as a 2025 test by Gates and Universal Transmissions, but full methodology and raw data are not publicly available.

[MVetter]

I chatted with AI regarding the efficiency number

amazing how quickly you can lose any and all credibility

[T.S. Zarathustra]

I chatted with AI regarding the efficiency number

amazing how quickly you can lose any and all credibility

Was there any to lose? Respect and credibility on the internet? Silly old me?   

I actually wanted to read the official testing and see what exactly was tested. What sort of belts and chains. Under what conditions. Technologia is advancing quickly. Almost any test results that are over ten years old are basically obsolete. It would maybe be going too far to say that tests over ten years old have lost any and all credibility. They have worth. If you have all the details they can often be interpolated to apply to more modern materials.
Unfortunately I was not surprised when no official test was found. Not that I could be bothered to spend very long time searching. Which is why I took a shortcut through AI. And stated so.
Which begs the question. Where do the much quoted chain/belt efficiency difference numbers originally come from? Was it really from a test of bicycle chains? Was it 520 chain vs 20 mm wide belt? 530 chain vs 50 mm wide belt? Were they new or run it? Was the test applicable to motorcycles? Was it under repeatable and controlled conditions?
Maybe you can find the source? If you can be bothered to spend any time searching.

[MVetter]

maybe you should ask AI

[Fran K]

If you really care a lot I will suggest coasting down a hill and seeing how fast you get going.  If you have a timing system and a few eyes/sensors one could get more exact doing no chain vs the other ways.   See if worn sprockets and chain is different from new ones.  What do  you guys run on Energica bikes x ring chains?  It is 1/4 inch wide sprockets 525 not 530 without looking it up.

[smithy]

If you really care a lot I will suggest coasting down a hill and seeing how fast you get going.  If you have a timing system and a few eyes/sensors one could get more exact doing no chain vs the other ways.   See if worn sprockets and chain is different from new ones.  What do  you guys run on Energica bikes x ring chains?  It is 1/4 inch wide sprockets 525 not 530 without looking it up.

I don't really care that much TBH...I just go on "real world seat of my pants" results....If at the end of my normal trip I see my SOC is similar or better...I don't complain. I've been running the same route to work and back since I bought the bike in early 2023...the SOC difference between when I ran chain and sprockets vs the synchronous belt and pulleys is negligible. There is a difference of +/-5% when running in winter vs summer...but this is unrelated to the chain or belt drive.

The Experia runs a 520 chain and sprockets...the other Energica bikes, SS9, Rebelle and Ego run a 525.

Smithy.

[T.S. Zarathustra]

maybe you should ask AI

Surely you're pulling my leg, sir. I did ask AI.

If you really care a lot I will suggest coasting down a hill and seeing how fast you get going.  If you have a timing system and a few eyes/sensors one could get more exact doing no chain vs the other ways.   See if worn sprockets and chain is different from new ones.  What do  you guys run on Energica bikes x ring chains?  It is 1/4 inch wide sprockets 525 not 530 without looking it up.

Coasting has many outside influences that can affect the results. For example tire pressure, wind, etc. When the margins are narrow those outside influences can skew the results.
I strive to always read the actual tests reports. It can tell you a lot about the accuracy of their results that other (maybe biased viewpoints) overlook.

[MVetter]

why would you use measured data like a sane person when you can ask AI

[Specter]

why spend 20 minutes digging shit up verifying it etc when AI can do the same search and verification you would do in a few seconds.

AI IS very useful for some tasks.  You just need to learn how to use it properly and understand what its limits are and not just regurgitate everything it says as gospel when you yourself dont have a clue how the system works that you asked it to diagnose for you.  Itll give you the first answer that might work, doesn't mean its the correct answer for your application especially if you gave it poor criteria to begin with

machines are incredibly efficient at following tasks if given properly
humans are incredibly poor at giving instructions

intel inside
idiot outside